-
Aspects Of Migili Verb Phrase
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
-
-
1.6 Data Collection
This research is made possible through the
bi-lingual language helper. However, the Ibadan four hundred word list
and some sentence constructions are used to extract necessary
information from the language helpers (informants) The method of
collection was through direct translation from English to Migili
language. The language helper speaks Migili, English, Hausa, and Eggon.
Mr.
Ayuba Osibi Haruna one of the language helper is a typist in the local
government secretariat, Agyaragu Obilocal government. Also, Revered
Albert, a man of God in Agyaragu.
1.7 Data Analysis
Statistically,
about one hundred and fifty sentences were collected from the native
speaker. In order to have accurate analysis for this research, the
Ibadan four hundred wordlist with an equivalent meaning of the item in
Migili language was used.
Also, the frame technique used in his
research is by framing of sentences in English language and the
translation of these sentences into Migili language by the informant.
This enables the researcher to determine the actual underlying form of a
word, constituent and possible syntactic classes to which each word
belongs to in Migili language.
1.8 Review of the Chosen Framework
The
theory to be used in the analysis of Verb Phrase in Migili language is
the Government and Binding theory (GB). This theory is a modular
deductive theory of universal grammar which posits multiple level of
representation related by the transformational rule. However, it is a
more advanced theory of universal grammar. Sanusi (1996:19-21).
Again,
Sanusi (1996: 21) explained that government and binding theory greatly
eliminates proliferation of transformational rules like passive, affix,
hoping verb-number agreement, question formation, equi-NP deletion,
raising permutation, insertion etc.
Hegman (1991: 13) defined
government and binding theory as a theory of universal grammar which is
the system of all the principles that are common to all human languages.
Government and binding theory is otherwise known as principle and
parameter theory.
In government and binding theory, the grammar is a
continuous interaction between component and sub-theories embodying
different principle and parameters.
Government and binding theory
operate through the modules of grammar like government, case, theta
control, binding, bounding, and X-bar theory.
1.8.1 Sub-Theories of Government and Binding
Horrock
(1987: 29) stated that, the core grammar of a given language is derived
from the interaction of sub-theories of universal grammar. These
sub-theories are inter-related that each of them can account for
grammaticality or ungrammaticality of any sentence. These sub-theories
are: X-bar theory, case theory, government theory, control theory,
binding theory, bounding theory and the theta theory.
The above listed sub-theories are diagrammatically represented below to show the inter-relationship among them.
MODULAR THEORY OF GRAMMAR
X-BAR Theory
ECP
Control
Binding
PHONETIC FORM LOGICAL FORM
(Adapted from Cook (1988: 33).
X-bar Theory
Based on appropriate analysis, for this research work, X-bar is the theory to be adopted for comprehensive analysis.
According to Chomsky (1981) “the X-bar theory is the central module of the principles and paramenters approach in syntaxâ€.
Also, Haegeman (1994) says that the X-bar theory is the part of grammar regulating the structure of a phrase.
The
core of X-bar theory is the recognition of the fact that phrasal
constituents have ‘head’ upon which the other elements of the
constituents in question are dependent. (Horrocks 1987: 63) He submits
that items which are involved in sub-categorization and which are in
most cases interrupted as arguments of the head, appear with the head X
in a phrasal category X-bar. X-bar is called a phrasal ‘projection’ of
head, in this case the smallest constituent X as a sub-constituent
(Horrocks, 1987: 64).
From the above, the cover symbol ‘X’ stands for
the set of lexical categories which head phrases, as in V (for verb), N
(for noun), Adj (for adjective), P (for preposition), Adv (for adverb),
such that N heads NP, V heads VP, P heads PP, Adj heads Adjp and Adv
heads Advp. This implies that phrasal categories e.g. VP, PP, NP, AP all
have heads that belong to the same category as the phrasal category
(Akmajian, 2001: 215).
Again, Horrocks (1987) explains that X-theory
periods principles for the projection of phrasal categories from lexical
categories and imposes conditions of hierarchical organization of
categories in the form of general schemata. Thus, the general phrase
structure rule schema for phrasal categories would be: XP Ã
X Comp.
Where ‘comp’ which stands for complement could be a
‘PP’ or an ‘NP’ with ‘X’ standing for a lexical category e.g. P. N, V
etc. This implies that when ‘X’ represents ‘N’, it means that ‘XP’ is an
‘NP’, when ‘X’ represents ‘V’, then ‘XP’ is a ‘VP’ and so on.
In
summary, the major concern of the X-bar theory is to describe the
syntactic and formal structures of phrases and the inherent general
characteristics they have in common.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
