Abstract

This paper argues that the stereotyped 'armchair linguist's research methodology based on limited introspected data and argumentation by the simplicity measure can be defended as long as the findings reveal insights into language. We first demonstrate that a simple and elegant 'Universal Grammar' for the side of the road to drive on can be achieved with just such a methodology. We then demonstrate the same point by contrasting the conventional lexical mapping theory (LMT) with a simplified version proposed in Her (2003). Finally, we demonstrate that the simplest, strictest interpretation of the Unified Mapping Principle or the ?-Criterion, as proposed in Her (2004), in fact better accounts for Mandarin resultative inversion than a relaxed but more complicated interpretation.