[Please ignore font formatting.]

(It is, in principle,
possible to have such a preliminary experiment as long as g(a, b) is based not only on a universal condition but also on a
language-particular condition because an experiment on the language-particular condition can serve as a preliminary
experiment for the one that involves the universal condition as well as the language-particular condition.

1. A parenthesis at the end is missing. (This is in part a reflection of the fact that JJL does not have a copy editor. We will find more errors like this in the future, I am afraid...)

2. an experiment on the language-particular condition can serve as a preliminary
experiment for the one that involves the universal condition as well as the language-particular condition

This is not quite right. What I had in mind was something like the following: Experiments on the a vs. so distinction and those on split antecedence deal with Japanese-particular, and hence language-particular, hypotheses, i.e., lexical hypotheses distinguishing between a-NPs and so-NPs in a crucial way with respect to their (in)ability to be B of BVA(A, B), regardless of the type of BVA (FD-based, co-I-based, or quirky-binding-based) and the lexical hypothesis about the singular-denoting property of so-itu and so-ko while experiments on the (un)availability of FD-based BVA deal with both universal hypotheses and language-particular hypotheses. We may be able to say that experiments on split antecedence are strictly language-particular, but those on a vs. so (that we have been conducting) are based on not only language-particular hypotheses but also universal hypotheses.

In the experiments on a vs. so (that we have been conducting), i.e., EPSA [10], the universal structural condition is satisfied both in Schema A and in Schema B but Schema A does, but Schema B does not, satisfy the lexical condition for BVA. In the experiments on the LF structural condition on BVA, i.e., EPSA [1], on the other hand, the lexical condition is satisfied both in Schema A and Schema B, but the the universal structural condition is satisfied only in Schema A, but not in Schema B.

So, the exposition above in the JJL paper is a bit sloppy.