1 Deletion Transformation in the Igbo Language NNEJI, OGECHUKWU MIRACLE [email protected] +2348063622121 Department of Linguistics, Igbo and other Nigerian languages University of Nigeria Nsukka. Abstract This paper studies the methods of applying transformational rule to deletion in the Igbo language. Having the concept of Universal Grammar in mind, that is the type of comparative syntactic investigation which seeks to provide an interlinguistic variation or similarities that may exist among languages, it examines the processes of deletion in Igbo; what happens from the deep structure to the surface structure that brings about this transformation and how it is relevant to the study of Igbo syntax, using the theoretical framework of Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG). The findings of the paper show that certain lexical items which are hitherto existent in the deep structure get deleted before getting to the surface structure through the application of deletion rules of imperativization, equi-VP deletion or equi-NP deletion. Our treatment of these types of deletion does not, in any way, suggest that only three types of deletion exist in languages but these are the only three deletion transformations observable in the standard Igbo. 1.0 Introduction Noam Chomsky’s transformational theories in the study of language have greatly influenced the learnability conditions of linguistics within the past six decades. His Transformational Generative Grammar (henceforth TGG) designed in 1957, which is an improvement on Harris’ (1951) transformational rules, has received a lot of attention and the most extensive exemplification and further development. Harris’ transformational rules were relations between sentences, for instance the relationship that exists between an active sentence NP 1 -V-NP 2 and its passive counterpart NP 2 -be-V-en-by-NP 1 . TGG comprises three components: the phrase structure (PS) component, the transformational component, and the morphophonemic component. Each of these components consists of a set of rules operating upon a certain “input” to yield a certain “output”.
Department of Linguistics, Igbo and other Nigerian languages University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Abstract This paper studies the methods of applying transformational rule to deletion in the Igbo language. Having the concept of Universal Grammar in mind, that is the type of comparative syntactic investigation which seeks to provide an interlinguistic variation or similarities that may exist among languages, it examines the processes of deletion in Igbo; what happens from the deep structure to the surface structure that brings about this transformation and how it is relevant to the study of Igbo syntax, using the theoretical framework of Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG). The findings of the paper show that certain lexical items which are hitherto existent in the deep structure get deleted before getting to the surface structure through the application of deletion rules of imperativization, equi-VP deletion or equi-NP deletion. Our treatment of these types of deletion does not, in any way, suggest that only three types of deletion exist in languages but these are the only three deletion transformations observable in the standard Igbo.
1.0 Introduction
Noam Chomsky’s transformational theories in the study of language have greatly
influenced the learnability conditions of linguistics within the past six decades. His
Transformational Generative Grammar (henceforth TGG) designed in 1957, which is an
improvement on Harris’ (1951) transformational rules, has received a lot of attention and the
most extensive exemplification and further development. Harris’ transformational rules were
relations between sentences, for instance the relationship that exists between an active
sentence NP1-V-NP2 and its passive counterpart NP2-be-V-en-by-NP1. TGG comprises three
components: the phrase structure (PS) component, the transformational component, and the
morphophonemic component. Each of these components consists of a set of rules operating
upon a certain “input” to yield a certain “output”.
2
With the application of transformation, two levels of structural presentation are in
agreement or conformity. In this paper, we shall examine in some details the deletion
transformation as it relates to the Igbo language. The Igbo language like other subject verb
object (SVO) languages can be subjected to different types of transformation. TGG was
introduced as an improvement on the Phrase Structure Grammar (PSG). Chomsky’s
chronological movement of grammar glides from Finite State Grammar (FSG) otherwise
known as Markov Process Grammar. FSG was introduced to represent a simple structure
relating one word in a language string to the next. It was presented as the simplest device
with the property of handling an infinite variety of sentences within a finite mechanism. The
numerous short comings of FSG which include, among others, its inability to analyze mirror
image constructions, and recursive sentences could not account for a detailed grammar of a
language. As an improvement on FSG, PSG was introduced. PSG is a more radical model of
grammar that makes use of rewrite rules. PSG together with XI syntax makes use of the
phrase marker which is a set of vertices or nodes connected by branches or lines. At the
bottom of the phrase marker are the terminal nodes which carry the lexical items of the
constituent structure or sentence. PSG is not without its shortcomings. An important point of
discussion in phrase marker is that of dominance and precedence. Dominance occurs at a
vertical range when an item is directly above another without any disruption while the
occurrence of precedence appears in a horizontal form. By this, we mean that the lexical
items share a linear relationship between each other where one comes before the other
without any intervening node between them. The disadvantages of PSG cannot provide and
arrange a clear rule that will guide the production of well-formed sentences especially those
with recursive constituents. It does not recognize the existence of intermediate categories.
This gave rise to the introduction of Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG). The
proponent of TGG argues that transformations are necessary to account for the relationship
3
between constituent structures: that the structures which otherwise appear different may have
the same origin and vice versa.
This paper therefore, focuses on the transformational deletion rule, which is one of the
transformational rules that aids in deriving the surface structure from the deep structure. The
paper is divided in sections. Section one which is the introduction presents a general
overview of the study, presenting the state of the art, and the operational definition of terms.
Section two which is the literature review is divided into two: theoretical review and
empirical review. In section three, data was analyzed while the last section summarizes the
work.
2.0 Literature Review
This section of the paper reviews previous literature in relation to the topic of study. The
section is divided into two – theoretical and empirical studies.
2.1 Theoretical Studies
According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1995), transformational rules do not
operate in isolation but constitute an integrated system. Transformations were originally
interpreted as string operations, mapping one string onto another by reordering, inserting, or
deleting material. The passive transformation given in the introduction involves the first two
operations. As such, it can be modelled by a context-sensitive rewrite rule. Transformations
that delete material, however, are unrestricted rewrite rules.
Ndimele (1999) observes that deletion is a process by which some lexical items are
dropped in the course of transformation. Nwala (2004) identifies dative movement,
imperativzation, Equi-NP deletion, and Equi-VP deletion as the types of deletion. To Agbedo
(2000) and Anagbogu et al (2010), deletion is the elimination of certain constituents from the
4
deep structure. Anagbogu, Mbah and Eme (2010) include dative movement while Agbedo
adds relativization as another instance of deletion.
Nwala (2004) and Anagbogu et al (2010) agree that dative movement deletion
involves a change of position between the direct object (DO) and indirect object (IO). At the
surface structure, the IO is seen to perform the function of the DO as a result of the deletion
of the preposition “to”.
Another name for underlying structure is deep structure. Anagbogu, Mbah and Emeh
(2010) observe that the deep structure “is that area of grammar where all the phenomena
which make an utterance meaningful are fully specified.” To Tomori (1977:82), the deep
structure of a sentence is the “underlying syntactico-semantic component of the sentence.”
Therefore, one can say that the deep structure is the abstract form of a sentence before it is
uttered.
Transformations were originally interpreted by Tomori (1977) and Ndimele (1999) as
string operations, mapping one string onto another by reordering, inserting, or deleting
material(s). Transformation according to Emenanjo (1978) is a complete change to something
that makes it have an improved appearance or usefulness. We can however say that
transformation is the change which takes place at the deep or underlying structure level that
affects both the syntactic and semantic relevance of the sentence. In the course of this change,
some lexical items change their positions in the sentence while others are moved and yet
some others get deleted.
Deep structure (henceforth DS) is an abstract level of representation that underlies the
syntactic structures of any sentence. This is to say that another name for DS is underlying
structure. It is at the DS that all the features which make utterances or sentences meaningful
5
are specified. Ndimele (1999) observes that the sequences of grammatical units upon which
transformational rules operate are the DS.
To achieve the desired change on the deep structure, transformational rules (T-rules)
are used. T-rules operate to link the deep structure to the surface structure. They cannot
change the meaning of the sentence. According to Chomsky (1964), T-rules are meaning-
preserving. As a parametric variation, each language selects its T-rules depending on the
structure of such language. Ndimele (1999:159) observes that “every T-rule selects a
sequence of symbols as its input, and then turns them into another set of symbols as its output
in accordance with certain conditions that operate in that language.”
Lexical items are said to be co-referential when they are identical in meaning and
perform the same function in a sentence. The first of these lexical items is the antecedent
while the second is seen as the anaphor. Illustrating with the sentence: Ada gburu nne ya
(Ada killed her mother), ‘ya’ which is the anaphor is the same person as and refers to Ada, its
antecedent. The anaphor does not have any independent meaning outside its antecedent.
Ndimele (1999) and Tomori (1977) suggest an alternate name for nested category as
mirror-image properties and constituent sentence respectively. According to them, a mirror-
image property is an embedded clause or sentence which disrupts the sequence of
constituents in the main clause. It can be said to be recursive structures that are derivable
from a sentence.
2.2 Empirical Studies
Johnson observes that there are situations in which we are more confident about
where the relevant θ–marked position is, and the argument bearing that θ–role is spoken
somewhere else.
6
Radford (1988) argues that the two levels of structure (DS and S) are inter-related by
a set of movement rules known technically as transformations. He discusses a number of T-
rules including Verb movement, I movement (responsible for the phenomenon generally
known as “Subject Auxiliary Inversion” which has a central role to play in the syntax of
direct questions in English), NP (Noun Phrase) movement (NP movement in passive
structures, raising structures and ergative and middle structures), extraposition, and WH-
movement (Wh- questions). In fact, his work focuses more on movement transformations
discussing in some details the phenomenon of subject auxiliary inversion, and different types
of NP movement. He uses IP movement to derive an interrogative sentence as below where S
stands for subject.
[ Ce] [S He [ I will] [ VP tell the truth]
[ C Will ] [S he [ I - ] [VP tell the truth] ]?
Newton (2011) studies affix-hopping and Do-support in Old Irish. In the study, she
discovers that there is a parallel relationship between Old Irish affix hopping and that of
English, where tense and agr(eement) features are argued to lower from T to V. She does not
give the specified meaning of T and V, and did not back up her studies with clear examples.
Encyclopaedia Britannica (EB) also observes that TG is an offshoot of PSG
representing the sentence “the man hit the ball” at the PSG level as “the man will hit the ball”
at the TG level thereby inserting the auxiliary verb “will” into the second sentence.
Chomsky’s (1957) rule for passivization is given as NP1-Aux-V-NP2→ NP2-Aux+be-en-V-
by+NP1. According to EB, this rule of passivization presupposes and depends on the prior
application of a set of PS rules. Using this rule, the second sentence above “the man will hit
the ball” will be generated as “the ball will be hit by the man” as shown below.
The man [NP1] will [Aux] hit [V] the ball [NP2] - Active voice
7
The ball [NP2] will [Aux] be [be+en] hit [V] by [by] the man [NP1] - Passive voice.
The ability of a speaker to know the right transformation to apply at any given time is
what is called linguistic competence, knowing the transformations that are obligatory and
those that are optional. If transformation rules are misapplied, the result will be
ungrammaticality of the sentence.
Napoli (1996) presents another name for dative movement as “spray/load sentences”
using two pairs of sentences as examples.
a) Joan sprayed paint on the wall.
Joan sprayed the wall with paint.
b) I wrapped the child in a blanket.
I wrapped a blanket around the child.
The prepositions used in each of the pairs is different (on vs with; and in vs around).
Waya (2010) studies deletion in Tiv and discovers that imperativization, equi-NP
deletion, and equi-VP deletion under the condition of indefiniteness exist in the language.
Even though these transformations were not discussed in detail as to how they occur in the
language, Waya presents a shallow example of deletion under the condition of indefiniteness
thus.
Hanma kwaghyan doo - Every food is good
Kwaghyan doo - Food is good.
His method of analysis does not tell us the word class of the words, or the original form of the
sentence at the deep structure level.
8
3.0 Data Analysis
In this section, data from the Igbo language are analyzed to show how deletion
transformation rules operate in the language.
3.1 Imperative Deletion
Imperativization in Igbo involves the deletion of the second person pronoun (either singular
or plural) and the modal auxiliary verb ‘ga’ in a sentence. Examples.
1a) { ga-apx ebe a - You will leave this place
NP Aux VP
{ ga apx ebe a- You will leave this place
1b) Ø ga apx ebe a- Will leave this place
1c) Ø px ebe a - Leave this place
1d) Pxq ebe a - Leave this place
At the deep structure level, sentence 1b appears as 1a. The deletion of {, the second person
singular pronoun leaves us with 1b. The deletion process continues with the elimination of
the auxiliary verb ‘ga’, to yield the terminal structure in 1d. It should be however noted that
the deletion of ‘ga’ brought about the insertion of ‘q’ in ‘pxq to derive pxq ebe a. Deletion
worked together with insertion to yield the grammatical construct in 1d.
2a) { ga-enye m ego - You will give me money
NP1 Aux VP NP2
{ [NP1] ga [Aux] enye m ego
2b) Ø ga enye m ego- Will give me money
2c) Ø nye m ego- Give me money
2d) Nyem ego - Give me money
9
3a) Unu ga-ab[ a akwxkwq - You will come to school
NP1 Aux VP NP2
Unu [NP] ga [Aux] ab[ a [V] akwxkwq [NP2]
3b) Ø ga ab[ a akwxkwq - Will come to school
3c) Ø b[ a akwxkwq - Come to school
3d) B[ a akwxkwq. - Come to school
4a) Ha ga-ab[a ebe a - They will come here
NP1 Aux VP NP2
Ha [NP] ga [Aux] ab[ a ebe a [VP]
4b) Ø ga ab[a ebe a - Will come here
4c) Ø b[ a ebe a - Come here
4d) B[ a ebe a - Come here
5a) Unu hapxnx m aka. - You leave me alone
NP1 VP NP2
Unu [NP1] hapxnx [VP] m [NP2]
5b) Ø hapx m aka - Leave me alone
5c) Hapx m aka - Leave me alone
It is the same deletion process which applies to 1 that also applies to 2-5 except that in
1, insertion of the extensional suffix ‘q’ to the verb root ‘px’ is introduced. Examples 1-5
show that even though some elements are deleted from Igbo sentences, grammaticality is still
retained because the original ideas are maintained in the (d) part of each of the sentences,
where (a) represent the DS and (d) stand for the surface structure except in 5 where the
surface structure is (c). In the Igbo language, imperativization is an optional transformation. It
depends on the choice of the speaker whether to realize the sentence in its deep structure or in
kernel form.
10
3.2 Deletion under the Condition of Identity
Deletion under the condition of identity deals basically with repeated elements
especially in conjoined sentences. Linguistic economy demands that repeated elements
should be deleted leaving their heads. We shall study equi-VP deletion or VP deletion under
identity and Equi-NP deletion or NP deletion under identity.
3.2.1 Equi-VP Deletion
Equi-VP deletion is prevalent mostly in nouns that are compound in nature at the D-
structure. In this case, the second verb phrase (VP) is deleted. Examples.
6a) Okek↓e na Okafq gara qrx - Okeke and Okafq went work.
Okek↓e na Okafq [NP] gara qrx [VP]
At the DS, the above sentence is a compound of two independent sentences as in b and c
below.
NP VP
b) Okek↓e gara qrx - Okeke went work
c) Okafq gara qrx - Okafq went work
The implication is that the VP of the sentence ‘gara qrx is repeated in the kernel form. This
duplication gives room for the second VP to be deleted under the condition of identity giving
us the form in 6a at the surface structure. The same applies to 7-9 below.
NP VP
7a) Xtara na ofe d[ xtq - Garri and soup are sweet.
b) Xtara d[ xtq - Garri is sweet
c) Ofe d[ xtq - Soup is sweet.
11
The second VP ‘d[ xtq in 7c is deleted to derive the structure in 7a.
NP VP
8a) Nneji na Nnaji bx mmadx - Nneji and Nnaji are human beings
b) Nneji bx mmadx - Nneji is a human being
c) Nnaji bx mmadx - Nnaji is a human being
The second VP ‘bx mmadx in 8c is deleted to yield the structure in 8a.
NP1 AUX VP NP2
9a) A na m akwado ↓ul↓e si ntak[ s[ na fqneti k[s[ - I am preparing for syntax and phonetics exams.
b) A na m akwado ↓ul↓e si ntak[ s[ - I am preparing for syntax exams
c) A na m akwado ↓ul↓e fqneti k[s[ - I am preparing for phonetics exams.
The second VP ‘akwado ↓ul↓e is deleted
3.2.2 Equi-NP Deletion
While Equi-VP deletion deals with the Verb Phrase, Equi-NP deletion concentrates on
deleting a duplicated Noun Phrase (NP) in a compound sentence. This is exemplified using
10 and 11 below.
NP VP
10a) Obi gara ah[ a, zxta ube, oroma, na akwukwqnri
Obi went to market, bought pears, oranges and vegetables.
At the DS, 10a is a combination of four sentences as follows.
10b) - Obi [pst] ga ah[ a
- Obi [pst] zxta ube
12
- Obi [pst] zxtaoroma,
- Obi [pst] zxta akwukwqnri
Since linguistic economy demands that repeated elements be deleted leaving their heads, we
shall have 10c.
10c) Obi [pst] ga ah[ a, [pst] zxta ube, [pst] zxtaoroma, [pst] zxta akwukwqnri
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. Mouton: The Hague.
Chomsky, N. (1964). Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. Mouton: The Hague.
Crystal, D. (1997). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 4th Edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Emenanjo, E.N. (1978). Elements of Modern Igbo Grammar. Ibadan: Oxford University Press.
Encyclopaedia Britannica (1995). “Linguistics: Methods of Synchronic Linguistic Analysis”. Available in http://files.ifi.uzh.ch/cl/volk/SyntaxVorl/Chomsky,html. Retrieved on 17/05/2011.
Harris, Z.S. (1951). Methods in Structural Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, K. (2007). Introduction to Transformational Grammar. Massachusetts: Fall.
Napoli, D.J. (1996). Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ndimele, O.M. (1999). A First Course on Morphology and Syntax. Port Harcourt: Emhai Printing and Publishing.
Newton, G. (2011). “Accounting for Do-Support Post-Syntactically: Evidence from Irish.” Preceedings of the 32nd Annual Pennsylvanian Linguistic Colloquim, Volume 15. Pennsylvania: University of Pennysylvania Press. Pp 163-172.
Nwala, M.A. (2004). Introduction to Linguistics: A First Course. Abakaliki: Wisdom Publishers.
Nwala, M.A. (2004). Introduction to Syntax: The Students Guide. Abakaliki: Wisdom Publishers Limited.
OluTomori, S.H. (1977). The Morphology and Syntax of Present-day English. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books.
Radford, A. (1988). Transformational Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waya, D.T. (2010). “Deletion in Tiv: A Transformational Analysis.” PG Seminar Paper, Department of Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria Nsukka.
