Performance also took on a different meaning. On the one hand, Chomsky
(1995) asserted that performance consists of having a language and the mental
mechanisms necessary to produce that language. But in doing so, he recog-
nized the limitations of this proposal and noted that a full explanation of “per-
formance” would require “the development of performance theories, among
them, theories of production and interpretation. Put generally, the problems are
beyond reach” (p. 18). Thus, performance in the MP has a theoretical basis that
must model how people generate and understand language, a task that
Chomsky deemed beyond us.
The End of Transformation Rules
Perhaps the most striking feature of the minimalist program was the elimina-
tion of transformation rules and deep structure. As Chomsky (1995) noted,
“D-Structure disappears, along with the problems it raised” (p. 189). The lexi-
con takes on a central role, assuming responsibility for many of the functions
once performed by transformation rules. As Chomsky (1995) explained:
The lexicon is a set of lexical elements, each an articulated system of
features. It must specify, for each such element, the phonetic, seman-
tic, and syntactic properties that are idiosyncratic to it, but nothing
more.... The lexical entry of the verbhitmust specify just enough of its
properties to determine its sound, meaning, and syntactic roles
through the operation of general principles, parameterized for the lan-
guage in question. (pp. 130–131)Stated another way, the computational system selects words from the lexi-
con and combines them into linguistic expressions in keeping with the various
semantic and syntactic restrictions associated with each word.
This departure from T-G grammar must be considered carefully to gauge
its effects. The minimalist program keeps meaning as a form of mentalese,
but now meaning is deemed to reside in the individual words that make up the
lexicon. The meaning of sentences arises from their particular combinations
of words. Advantages appear immediately. No longer do we face the embar-
rassing situation of transformations that change meaning or that sometimes
produce ungrammatical sentences. Syntax determines meaning, for the struc-
tural restrictions of words themselves will dictate whether a word functions
as, say, a subject or a verb.
In the MP, the process of combination—or derivation, in keeping with T-G
terminology—involves only four rules:merge, agree, move,andspellout.Let’s
consider a simple sentence and see how the process works:
188 CHAPTER 5