The last few paragraphs of the last section (Section 6) of Chapter 7 are currently as follows:
(The formatting is lost and the footnotes are not supplied here.)

　　The merit of employing notions of Main-Hypotheses and Sub-Hypotheses and those of the Main-Experiment and its Sub-Experiments should be appreciated in light of the theory-laden nature of language faculty science, as just reviewed. I.e., they are for the purpose of making the result of our Main-Experiment as significant as possible with regard to the validity of the Main-Hypotheses tested in the Main-Experiment, as discussed in the preceding pages.
　　We would naturally like to see (i) whether there are properties of FD other than those specified by [U1] and [U2], (ii) whether there are dependency interpretations that must be based on FD but is distinct from BVA, and (iii) whether there are other formal objects/relations that must be based on LF c-command but is distinct from FD. To the extent that we have affirmative answers to these questions and to the extent that we find out about properties of what is mentioned in (i)-(iii) by the "Guess-Deduce-Compare" method, we will have more confidence about our hypotheses including the bridging hypotheses.
　　As to (i), there seems to be another structural condition on FD, which prevents a and b of FD(a, b) from being co-arguments of a predicate. As to (ii), there seem to be two other types of anaphoric relations that are based on FD; one is the so-called sloppy-identity reading and the other is a particular instance of coreference. As to (iii), what underlies one type of the scope dependency interpretation seems to be one such object/relation. Discussion of each of (i)-(iii) involves complications of a substantive magnitude, and the space limit prevents me from even illustrating the relevant phenomena here, let alone discussing the designs and the results (that we have obtained so far) of the Experiments testing the relevant predicted schematic asymmetries. I can only state here that the results reported in this chapter forms a basis for our investigation of issues pertaining to (i)-(iii), and that the Experimental results we have obtained so far dealing with (i)-(iii) provide support for the hypotheses discussed in this chapter, and hence, indirectly, for the proposed methodology for language faculty science as an exact science.