This article was nominated for deletion on 10 August 2016. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles Linguistics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article barely explains Wolfe's thesis, then launches into multiple paragraphs of criticism. This imbalance is absurd. GeneCallahan ( talk) 14:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Yes! Agreed! The summary of the book is so wrong and biased. This article must have been drafted by a career researcher in phrenology, whoops I mean generative grammar. 46.251.207.0 ( talk) 09:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Agreed with GeneCallahan. My jaw literally dropped open when I read this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.53.72.146 ( talk) 01:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC) reply