Deep structure and surface structure

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.

The 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 Chomsky's 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".

Chomsky 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.

The "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 grammar—the 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 Chomsky's 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 notion of deep structure, applying to a two-level generative structure for melody, harmony, and rhythm, of which the analysis by Lee (1985) of rhythmical structure is an instance. See also Chord progression#Rewrite rules.

See also

• Transformational grammar
• Deep Structure Studies (DSS Ⅰ-Ⅵ)
• Deep Structure Studies I The Third Synthesis of Biology

Authored by Winpen Hann

Darwinian biology is actually two directions. One is the well-known modern synthesis, which has an enlarged and revised evolutionary model combining the new genetics. Another is derived from the modern synthesis by introducing intraspecific adaptation comparison to microphysiology, creatively explained intraspecies variations, and life-history variations (e.g., adjusted seed size, varied offspring, adjusted reproductive timing, diversified sizes of individuals, adjusted sex determination or sex ratio, altered shape or behavior, regulated life history, transformed organ structures, etc.). This new biology developed very rapidly and is having an intense impact on the whole of life science. This super-synthesis is the third after evolutionism and the modern synthesis.

This book makes a systematic summary on the developments of new biology for recent forty years, and provides richful consulation for biologists to select and grasp the future mainstream of life science.

• Deep Structure Studies II New Experimental Biology

Authored by Winpen Hann

Modern biology has reached its limit in micro-oriented research-e.g., the predicament of the genome explanation project, difficulty in neuro-electro-signal decoding, how to make clear molecular metabolic network, etc. The "complexity" is the symbolization of biological history's inflection point. There are two brewing developmental directions in contemporary life science. One is the "systematic biology," which plans to synthetize huge quantities of molecular data by computing and systematic simulation. The other is the new innovation of "deep-structure theory" which introduce new concepts of "background modulation" and "vitastate" experimental and analytical models to analyze transformation of physio-morphs. The former might be trapped into trouble by "complexity," while the latter can avoid the information explosion.

This Book has reviewed various schools of biological experiments for nearly 40 years, and developed deep-structure experimental system which open up new road for the major experimental fields of post-genomics, brain science, super AI, knotty diseases and so on

• Deep Structure Studies Ⅲ The Brain's Super Intelligence Analysis

Winpen Hann (Author), Haina Hwa (Author) There are actually two different directions in the study of neural information analysis and artificial intelligence simulation; one is electroneurographic signal decoding and artificial neural network experimentation, which uses mainstream methods of contemporary neural science, and the other is brain deep-structure analysis and its artificial simulation, which arises from adaptational biology and deep-structure theory. The former has met with an analysis and experimental dilemma because of the connotation-meaning black hole and information explosion. The latter can possibly overcome these two major obstacles and bring new hope and a breakthrough for brain science and super computer research.

References

1. The Third Synthesis of Biology: Deep Structure Studies I,Winpen Hann,2012,ISBN-13: 978-1466442252. https://www.createspace.com/3705738

5.New Experimental Biology: Deep Structure Studies II,Winpen Hann,2012,ISBN-13: 978-1467987189. https://www.createspace.com/3714426

6.The Brain's Super Intelligence Analysis ,Winpen Hann,Haina Hwa,2012,ISBN-13: 978-1470089658. https://www.createspace.com/3730794

General references

1. Noam Chomsky (1957). Syntactic Structures. Mouton.
2. Noam Chomsky (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press.
3. Noam Chomsky (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Mouton.
4. Noam Chomsky (1986). Barriers. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs. MIT Press.
5. C. S. Lee (1985). "The rhythmic interpretation of simple musical sequences: towards a perceptual model", in P. Howell, I. Cross and R. West (eds.), Musical Structure and Cognition (Academic Press), pp. 53–69.
6. Richard Middleton (1990). Studying Popular Music. Open University Press.
7. Samovar, L, & Porter, R (August 2003). Communication between Culures .Wadsworth Publishing.