The organization and structure of the lexicon in a linguistic performance model is here examined, using data elicited from dyslexic patients suffering from focal brain lesions. It is argued that phonological, semantic, and orthographic representations, in separate sub-lexicons, are needed to account for the selective reading and writing disorders. The role of such data and their relevance to linguistic theory are discussed. Linguistic concepts provide the framework for investigating both normal and abnormal (e.g. aphasic) speech production and comprehension. In turn, data from aphasia may provide new insights into the nature of the mental grammar.

The comprehensive theory of predication developed by Williams (1980, 1982, 1983) subsumes a wide range of phenomena, but contains some internal problems. An alternative account is presented here which does not postulate a distinct level of Predicate Structure, but assumes that pro may be governed. This entails new analyses of small clauses and control phenomena, and leads to a revision of the conditions under which empty elements may occur.

The universal grammatical categories noun and verb are held susceptible to notional characterization. The traditional objections to this claim are overcome by an appropriate view of linguistic semantics, one based on cognitive processing and the structuring of conceptual content. Reasonably precise semantic descriptions of the noun and verb categories are proposed in the context of the cognitive grammar framework. The distinction between count and mass nouns is explicated, and is shown to be a direct analog of the fundamental aspectual distinction between verbs that designate perfective and imperfective processes. The analysis permits the elucidation of subtle semantic contrasts and the explanation of various grammatical phenomena.

Colloquial ‘tautologies’ such as War is war or A promise is a promise have often been adduced in support of a ‘Gricean’ account of language use. The present article shows, however, that ‘tautological constructions’ are partly conventional and language-specific, and that each such construction has a specific meaning which cannot be fully predicted in terms of any universal pragmatic maxims. It is argued that the attitudinal meanings conveyed by various tautological constructions and by similar linguistic devices should be stated in rigorous and yet self-explanatory semantic formulae. ‘Radical pragmatics’ is rejected as a blind alley, and an integrated approach to language structure and language use is proposed, based on a coherent semantic theory which is capable of representing ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ aspects of meaning in a unified framework.