In this chapter we will first discuss Chomsky's criteria for the adequacy of a theory of grammar and how they are related to (1) the use of computers in linguistic research, (2) the assumption of an ideal language user, (3) the role of linguistic universals in a theory, and (4) the connection between syntax and semantics. We will look at some of the ways to compare and evaluate theories of syntax. Then different accounts of syntax will be examined and compared. In the next chapter we will discuss our own model of syntactic operations and compare it with those discussed here.

Chomsky's criteria for an adequate theory

Noam Chomsky (1957) proposed three criteria that an adequate theory of grammar should satisfy. By grammar, he meant both syntax and morphophonemics, but we will be concerned only with syntax. Theories of syntax in their present stage of development are far from providing a complete account of all language; instead they propose programs or directions for research, setting out the kinds of rules that would be necessary for a complete account. No theory actually satisfies Chomsky's three criteria, but many justify their programs in terms of the likelihood of doing so. As we shall see, the interpretation of how the criteria are to be met differ from theory to theory.

The criteria are:

1. A theory of grammar should provide a set of rules that can generate all and only syntactically correct strings.

2. The rules should also generate correct structural descriptions for each grammatical string.

3. […]