The theory of universal grammar relies heavily on the biolinguistic concept of natural endowment and innate knowledge of the general principles of language. It postulates that all humans are naturally endowed with the general rules and configurations of language and to this extent, all natural languages have similar structural features.
The theory of universal grammar as hypothesised by Chomsky and propagated by other linguists however recognizes the existence of language-specific idiosyncratic features that constitute parametric variations among languages. These are the parameters of universal grammar. The most prominent parameters that create distinctions between languages are head directionality, pro-drop or null-subject and wh- parameters.
This paper reviews the null-subject parameter in English and juxtaposes its occurrence or non-occurrence in Izon language and its implications for language acquisition.
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction
1.1. Principles and Parameters
2.0. The Structure of the English language
3.0. Null-subject manifestation in Izọn language
3.1. Null-subject in interrogatives in Izọn language.
4.0. Implications for language acquisition
5.0. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper provides a comparative syntactic review of the null-subject parameter, analyzing the differences and similarities between English and the Izọn language while exploring the implications of these parametric variations for language acquisition.
- Theoretical foundations of Universal Grammar and Principles and Parameters Theory
- Syntactic structures of the English language and its non-pro-drop status
- Manifestation of null-subjects in declarative and interrogative Izọn sentences
- Comparative analysis of head directionality and subject-verb agreement
- Implications of parametric choices for second language acquisition
Extract from the Book
3.0. Null-subject manifestation in Izọn language
Izọn is a language spoken by the Izọn or Ijaw peoples who inhabit areas in the Niger Delta basin of Southern Nigeria. It has varieties in Kolokuma dialect, Arogbo dialect, and some pro-Ijaw or Ijoid languages such as Kalabari, Nembe, Ibani, Okrika, Defaka, among others. Kolokuma dialect is adopted in this paper because it is a central variety intelligible to speakers of other varieties. While the English sentence has an SVO structure, a finite clause in Izọn language has the canonical structure of SOV (Williamson 1969, Kwokwo 2012:5). This is in spite of the fact that the object and the verb remain constituents of the verb phrase (VP) and of course, the object remains and functions as complement of the verb. It is a syntactic reality that Izọn is a head-final language and this accounts for the assignment of accusative Case left-ward. This is the syntactic opposite of English clause structure which is a head-first language. It may be noted that head directionality, and indeed, case-directionality are also parameter in UG and PPT (cf Ndimele 1992:40).
It is also a linguistic fact that Izọn permits both overt-subjects and null-subjects in its sentence structure. Null-subjects which, syntactically, are empty categories are found in all types of derivations namely, the declarative, imperative and interrogative sentence. This is to say that beyond the general principles of universal grammar available to it, the Izọn language also has null-subject as an idiosyncratic or peripheral feature which serves as part of the component of (triggering) experience or stimulus in the process of language acquisition. Examples of both the canonical SOV linear structure and the pro-drop sentence are provided below.
Summary of Chapters
1.0 Introduction: Introduces the theory of Universal Grammar and the Principles and Parameters Theory, establishing the basis for comparing null-subject parameters across languages.
1.1. Principles and Parameters: Details the theoretical framework of Universal Grammar as a set of innate principles and specific parametric choices that differentiate languages.
2.0. The Structure of the English language: Examines English as a non-pro-drop, SVO language where the subject must be overtly realized in declarative sentences.
3.0. Null-subject manifestation in Izọn language: Analyzes the SOV structure of the Izọn language and its syntactic flexibility in permitting both overt and null subjects.
3.1. Null-subject in interrogatives in Izọn language.: Explores how null-subjects function within wh- and polar interrogative structures in the Izọn language.
4.0. Implications for language acquisition: Discusses how the null-subject parameter impacts the learning process and how language processing interacts with parametric choices.
5.0. Conclusion: Summarizes the parametric distinctions between English and Izọn and reiterates the role of these features in language acquisition.
Keywords
Universal Grammar, Principles and Parameters, Parametric Variations, Null-subject, English, Izọn, Syntax, Pro-drop, Language Acquisition, Linguistics, Head Directionality, Comparative Syntax, SOV, SVO, Generative Grammar
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on a comparative syntactic review of the null-subject parameter between the English language and the Izọn language.
What are the central theoretical frameworks utilized in this work?
The study is grounded in the Principles and Parameters Theory (PPT) and the theory of Universal Grammar (UG) developed by Noam Chomsky.
What is the main research objective?
The objective is to elucidate how speakers of English and Izọn acquire their respective languages by navigating different parametric arrangements regarding null-subjects.
Which linguistic method is applied to analyze these languages?
The author employs comparative syntax to contrast the SVO structure of English with the SOV structure of Izọn, specifically focusing on pro-drop phenomena.
What does the main body of the paper address?
It addresses the structural differences between the languages, the occurrence of null-subjects in Izọn declarative and interrogative sentences, and the implications of these features for second language learning.
Which keywords characterize this linguistic study?
The study is characterized by keywords such as Universal Grammar, null-subject, parametric variations, and comparative syntax.
How does the null-subject parameter differ between English and Izọn?
English is identified as a non-pro-drop language that requires overt subjects, whereas Izọn is flexible and permits both overt and null-subjects in its sentences.
Why is Izọn considered a flexible language in terms of syntax?
Izọn is considered flexible because it lacks subject-verb agreement and allows for the omission of subject pronouns in various syntactic derivations, which are recoverable through context.
What role does the 'ideal hearer' play in the interpretation of null-subjects?
The ideal hearer possesses the internalized linguistic knowledge and communicative competence to recover and interpret the meaning of covert subjects from the context of communication.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Odingowei Kwokwo (Autor:in), 2010, A Comparative Syntactic Review of Null-Subject Parameter in English and Izon Languages, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/314744
