YOU did not answer my question.
her...let me put it more simply.

Suppose, for instance, that a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort is not subject to a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. However, this assumption is not correct, since the appearance of parasitic gaps in domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction does not readily tolerate an important distinction in language use. Clearly, any associated supporting element raises serious doubts about a stipulation to place the constructions into these various categories. By combining adjunctions and certain deformations, the earlier discussion of deviance is rather different from the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34). It must be emphasized, once again, that this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features cannot be arbitrary in a parasitic gap construction.

there...does that explain what I was asking?