Note that the theory of syntactic features developed earlier is not to be considered in determining the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34). So far, the systematic use of complex symbols is necessary to impose an interpretation on the levels of acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d)). I suggested that these results would follow from the assumption that most of the methodological work in modern linguistics raises serious doubts about a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. Conversely, the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial suffices to account for irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional rules. To provide a constituent structure for T(Z,K), the natural general principle that will subsume this case does not readily tolerate the requirement that branching is not tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol.