This article clarifies some ideas presented in this issue’s keynote article (Amaral and Roeper, this issue) and discusses several issues raised by the contributors’ comments on the nature of the Multiple Grammars (MG) theory. One of the key goals of the article is to unequivocally state that MG is not a parametric theory and that its current version follows very explicit minimalist assumptions. We also refine the notion of ‘minimal multiple rules’ to make their theoretical status more precise. Overall, we would like to acknowledge the important contribution of all the articles in this issue to the evolution of the theory.
AmaralLLeandroW (2013) The acquisition of the relativizer -uraz in Wapichana. In: Conference on Recursion in Brazilian Languages and Beyond. Rio de Janeiro: UFRJ.
2.
AmaralLRoeperT (2014, this issue) Multiple Grammars and second language representation. Second Language Research30(1).
3.
ArsenijevicBHinzenW (2012) On the absence of X-within-X recursion in human grammar. Linguistic Inquiry43: 423–40.
4.
BaukeLRoeperT (2012) How Phase-based interpretations dictate the typology of nominalizations. In: Grewendorf GGZimmermanTE (eds) Discourse and Grammar: from sentence types to lexical categories. Walter de Gruyter: Berlin, 289–321.
5.
BrueningB (2013) Quotatives. Unpublished manuscript, Zentrum für Allgemeine Wissenschaft, Univerity of Ulm, Germany.
6.
ChomskyN (1956) Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory2: 113–24.
7.
de VilliersJ (1991) Why questions? In: PlunkettBMaxfieldT (eds) The acquisition of wh. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics. UMass: Amherst, MA, 155–75.
8.
FaberAAmaralLMaiaM (in progress) Subject pronoun resolution with epicene and bigender antecedents: A study of native and L2 processing.
9.
KrochATaylorA (1997) Verb movement in old and middle English: Dialect variation and language contact. In: van KremenadeAVincentN (eds) Parameters of morphological change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 297–35.
10.
LawallRMaiaMAmaralL (2012) Resolução pronominal com antecedents sobrecomuns e comuns de dois gêneros em português brasileiro como língua maternal, língua de herança e como segunda língua [Pronominal resolution with epicenes and bigenders in Brazilian Portuguese as first, second and heritage languages]. Linguística8: 134–58.
11.
LimbachMAdoneD (2010) Language acquisition of recursive possessives in English. Proceedings of BUCLD34. Boston, MA: Cascadilla Press, 281–90.
12.
RankinT (2013) Competing grammars in the comprehension of questions and relative clauses in L1 German – L2 English. Unpublished manuscript, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria.
13.
RoeperT (1999) Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition2: 169–86.
14.
RoeperT (2007) The prism of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
RoeperT (2011) Strict interfaces and three kinds of Multiple Grammars. In: RinkleEKupischT (eds) The development of grammar: Language acquisition and diachronic change. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 205–28.
16.
WexlerK (2011) Grammatical computation in the optional infinitive stage. In: de VilliersJRoeperT (eds) Handbook of generative approaches to language acquisition. Springer: Drodrecht, 53–118.
17.
YangC (2002) Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
