As I am sure Ted Dunning knows, the justification for describing
language in terms of two systems, viz. a ``competence'' grammar (which
generates the sentences Ted claims would never be uttered) and
``performance'' constraints (which determine just which sentences are
uttered, and in which contexts) is the claim that this constitutes the
simplest and ``most satisfying'' overall account of language behaviour.
Such a division seems to be conceptually necessary given a categorical
grammar that generates an infinite number of sentences (most of which
will never be uttered).
But it is not clear that the competence/performance division is
necessary if the grammar is conceived of as probabalistic in nature.
(Of course, one still has to come up with the model!)
Best
Mark Johnson
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rank Xerox Research Centre Tel: (33) 76 61 50 37
6, chemin de Maupertuis (33) 76 61 50 50
F38240 Meylan
FRANCE Fax: (33) 76 61 50 99
---------------------------------------------------------------------