Remarks on Meaning-Preservingness of Transformations

Abstract

Since Katz and Postal (1964), the meaning-preservingness condition of transformations has been recognized as one of the basic theoretical assumptions of the theory of generative-transformational grammar. l Katz and Postal (1964) have proposed this condition for the following reasons. First, it motivates better the postulation of grammatical transformations in generative grammar by allowing of the most generalized conception of transformation; i.e., the hypothesis that all transformations preserve meaning is the more generalized, therefore preferable, one than the hypothesis that all transformations affect meaning or the hypothesis that some transformations preserve meaning while others affect meaning. Second, it simplifies the semantic component by allowing semantic projection rules to apply only to underlying structures; in other words, if all transformations preserve meaning, semantic projection rules need not apply to derived or surface . structures. Third, all of the then proposed transformations can be motivated to comply with the meaning-preservingness condition. These motivations for the meaning-preservingness condition of transformations by Katz and Postal(1964) are not fully accepted by all generative grammarians now, but still considered as the general foundation for the discussion of the meaning-preservingness condition of transformations.