GRAMMAR - FORMAL AND FUNCTIONAL

             GRAMMAR - FORMAL AND FUNCTIONAL

FORMAL GRAMMAR

In formal language theory, a grammar (when the context is not given, often called a formal grammar for clarity) is a set of production rules for strings in a formal language. The rules describe how to form strings from the language's alphabet that are valid according to the language's syntax. A grammar does not describe the meaning of the strings or what can be done with them in whatever context—only their form.
Formal language theory, the discipline that studies formal grammars and languages, is a branch of applied mathematics. Its applications are found in theoretical computer science, theoretical linguistics, formal semantics, mathematical logic, and other areas.
A formal grammar is a set of rules for rewriting strings, along with a "start symbol" from which rewriting starts. Therefore, a grammar is usually thought of as a language generator. However, it can also sometimes be used as the basis for a "recognizer"—a function in computing that determines whether a given string belongs to the language or is grammatically incorrect. To describe such recognizers, formal language theory uses separate formalisms, known as automata theory. One of the interesting results of automata theory is that it is not possible to design a recognizer for certain formal languages.^[1] Parsing is the process of recognizing an utterance (a string in natural languages) by breaking it down to a set of symbols and analyzing each one against the grammar of the language. Most languages have the meanings of their utterances structured according to their syntax—a practice known as compositional semantics. As a result, the first step to describing the meaning of an utterance in language is to break it down part by part and look at its analyzed form (known as its parse tree in computer science, and as its deep structure in generative grammar).

FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR 

A theory of grammar concerned with the social and pragmatic functions of language, relating these to both formal syntactic properties and prosodic properties. 

Functional grammar is concerned with meanings. Functional grammar looks at language as consisting of units of meanings rather than chunks of forms. These units of meanings are represented in various oral and written texts. In keeping with the idea, functional grammar is interested to analyze language at the text level rather than sentences. Further, Halliday (1994) writes that there are 3 lines of meaning in the clause. (1) the theme functions in the structure of the clause as message (2) the subject functions in the structure of the clause as an exchange (3) the actor functions in the structure of the clause as representation. Giving more explanation about functional grammar, he adds that functional grammar makes extensive use of function labels like actor, process, goal, theme & rheme etc.

FORMAL AND FUNCTIONAL

Formal, or technical, and functional grammar are diff;cult of definition because each includes a body of knowledge, or content, and a method of teaching that content. Grammar has been defined as 'vthe science that treats of the principles that govern the correct use of language"; also as ;the art of speaking and writing a language correctly." We may say that formal grammar and functional grammar differ in a way indicated by these two definitions. We are teaching grammar as formal or functional according as we teach it from the science or the art side. This, however, is not suiciently distinctive. The two differ specifically in (I) purpose, (2) content, (3) method. I. Purpose. Those who advocate formal grammar teach it as the science of language, making its bearing upon correctness of speech incidental. They teach it primarily for the sake of the mental training; hence they declare themselves, in this regard at least, advocates of formal discipline. The purpose of functional grammar, as indicated by the name, is correction of speech. 2. Content. Since teachers who advocate formal grammar have the disciplining of the mind as their primary aim, they select content accordingly. Believing that the mind is trained by the study of a science in proportion as that science is logical and complete, they favor strongly the English grammar of the past, which was fashioned largely after the Latin grammar. As the Latin language is highly inflected its grammar is made up of a larger body of £acts, rules, and principles than is English grammar. Our language is analytic, having only a few inflections that still persist. The fine appearance that English grammar has been able to make as a science is due to its having been fashioned after the Latin grammar- not only fashioned after it, but translated from it. Those who wish to teach formal grammar wish to retain this large mass of Latinized material. They are influenced in this desire by their purpose. If the study of the science of lan- guage disciplines the mind-as iil their opinion it does-the more considerable the body of the science, in reason, the greater the discipline derived from the study. This accounts for the fact that the advocates of formal grammar prefer the grammar of a highly inflected language. Those who advocate functional gram- mar wish to teach only such facts and principles as apply to English. Indeed they go farther and say that formal grammar, properly taught, is a reflective study of language, that pupils in the grades have reached a stage of maturity that makes proStable a study, not of all the facts and principles of English, but only of such facts and principles as are necessary in daily speech, and that the finer points of our language have no place iil a grammar intended for the grades. It follows then that the content of functional grammar is much simpler than the content of formal grammar. The fulness of the content of the latter is shown in the case of nouns, nouns being declined with as much care iil all three cases as if they had three different forms instead of two, one for the nominative and objective and one for the possessive. This is done in spite of the fact that the possessive is the only case of nouns that gives trouble. 3. Method.- Functional grammar usually differs from formal as much in method as in purpose and content, though this is not necessarily true. The teacher of functional grammar tries all the time to tmpress upon her pupils that their speech must be governed by the laws of good usage, and that they have been applying these laws since they began to speak. She helps the pupils evolve these laws from their own speaking and writing, and shows them how to become more discriminating in the correction of their own errors. Functional grammar demands that the child's tme and energy be given to the study and application of those facts of grammar that will make him a better writer and speaker. The statement above made, that functional grammar usually differs from formal grammar as much in method as in purpose and content, may lead one astray. As a matter of fact one lesson of a series might be the same in formal and functional teaching.