deepstructure深层结构.doc

deep structure 深层结构 （与表层结构对立）表层结构就是我们看到的句子结构，比如说： 花瓶被他打碎了。深层结构就是从这个句子中能找出来的以不同词为主体的叙述结构。比如上面那个句子的深层结构就是： 他打碎（花瓶）碎了。 就是说，一部分是“他打碎花瓶”，另一部分是“花瓶碎了”；一个是施事即他以及这个动作，一个是受事即花瓶的状态。这个用深层结构表示的句子经过删除、增加、移位等变化可以转化为表层结构。 再举几个例子，像英语中的祈使句Open the door.的深层结构是You open the door please.被动句The picture is drawn by Tom.的深层结构是Tom draw （the picture) is drawn.所以深层结构基本上分析句子主体就能得到。深层结构是语法理论中构成句子结构基础的抽象语法关系，人们借此解释句子所表示的的意思。1在这一分析层次上可以区别陈述和询问两类句子，能够区别否定句和肯定句或主动句和被动句。例如，主动句“狗追猫”和被动句“猫被狗追”两种语态的意思是相同的。深层结构与表层结构相对称，表层结构是对人们所讲和所听的语句的直接语法分析层次，即依上述句子中词和词缀的特别顺序（the+dog+s.）的分析。深层结构与表层结构的区别，是1960年代由美国语言学家诺姆乔姆斯基提出的，此后已发展为产生语法的一个深奥部份。Deep structureFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search In linguistics, specifically in the study of syntax in the tradition of generative grammar (also known as transformational grammar), the deep structure of a linguistic expression is a theoretical construct that seeks to unify several related structures. For example, the sentences Pat loves Chris and Chris is loved by Pat mean roughly the same thing and use similar words. Some linguists, in particular Noam Chomsky, have tried to account for this similarity by positing that these two sentences are distinct surface forms that derive from a common deep structure. 1The concept of deep structure plays an important role in transformational grammar. In early transformational syntax, deep structures are derivation trees of a context free language. These trees are then transformed by a sequence of tree rewriting operations (transformations) into surface structures. The terminal yield of a surface structure tree, the surface form, is then predicted to be a grammatical sentence of the language being studied. The role and significance of deep structure changed a great deal as Chomsky developed his theories, and since the mid 1990s deep structure no longer features at all (see Transformational grammar).It is tempting to regard deep structures as representing meanings and surface structures as representing sentences that express those meanings, but this is not the concept of deep structure favoured by Chomsky. Rather, a sentence more closely corresponds to a deep structure paired with the surface structure derived from it, with an additional phonetic form obtained from processing of the surface structure. It has been variously suggested that the interpretation of a sentence is determined by its deep structure alone, by a combination of its deep and surface structures, or by some other level of representation altogether (logical form), as argued in 1977 by Chomskys student Robert May. Chomsky may have tentatively entertained the first of these ideas in the early 1960s, but quickly moved away from it to the second, and finally the third. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the generative semantics movement put up a vigorous defence of the first option, sparking an acrimonious debate, the Linguistics Wars.2Chomsky noted in his early years that by dividing deep structures from surface structures, one could understand slip of the tongue moments (where one says something that they did not intend) as instances where deep structures do not translate into the intended surface structure.3The surface appeal of the deep structure concept soon led people from unrelated fields (architecture, music, politics, and even ritual studies) to use the term to express various concepts in their own work. In common usage, the term is often used as a synonym for universal grammarthe constraints which Chomsky claims govern the overall forms of linguistic expression available to the human species. This is probably due to the importance of deep structure in Chomskys earlier work on universal grammar, though his concept of universal grammar is logically independent of any particular theoretical construct, including deep structure.According to Middleton (1990), Schenkerian analysis of music corresponds to the Chomskyan no