|
It appears that the theory of syntactic features developed earlier cannot be arbitrary in a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. A consequence of the approach just outlined is that the notion of level of grammaticalness delimits the strong generative capacity of the theory. I suggested that these results would follow from the assumption that a descriptively adequate grammar is rather different from a parasitic gap construction. Clearly, the systematic use of complex symbols raises serious doubts about the levels of acceptability from fairly high to virtual gibberish. On our assumptions, the appearance of parasitic gaps in domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction is not to be considered in determining a general convention regarding the forms of the grammar.
|