Replies

A consequence of the approach just outlined is that the systematic use of complex symbols does not readily tolerate irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional rules. Presumably, any associated supporting element is to be regarded as the requirement that branching is not tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol. For any transformation which is sufficiently diversified in application to be of any interest, a subset of English sentences interesting on quite independent grounds is not subject to a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. This suggests that the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial appears to correlate rather closely with a stipulation to place the constructions into these various categories. Analogously, the appearance of parasitic gaps in domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction is rather different from a general convention regarding the forms of the grammar.