ABSTRACT
Linguists have long argue d ove r what th e main goa l of linguistics should he. Should a grammar describe langllage in [onual terms, where such terms nccd not refer to psychological entities, or should a gra mrnar describe iohat speakers know about a langllage, where all terms refer to psycholog ical ent ities? W e shall provide abrief history of that controversy, and then, given the desirability of the latter goa l for psychol ogy, we shall assess th e psychological adequ acy of grammars. Towards this end we shall also take into account th e nature of child langnage acquisition, particularly th e relation of spee ch comprehe nsion and speech production . By applying such criteri a we shall th en be in a position to judge th e psychological adequacy of current gramrnars and to offer an alternative if need be.
