THE SPECIFIC FAILINGS ARE DISCUSSED IN THE SEMANTIC THEORY OF KATZ AND FODOR PROPOSED WITHIN CHOMSKY'S CURRENT TRANSFORMATIONAL FRAMEWORK. THE FIRST DEALS WITH THE SO-CALLED "RELATIONAL" CONCEPTS. FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS NOT EASY TO SEE HOW ANY SLIGHT MODIFICATION OF THE NOTION OF "SEMANTIC FEATURE" CAN LEAD TO THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF COMPARATIVE SENTENCES. THE SECOND IS THAT "ENTAILMENT RULES" ARE NOT PROVIDED, WHICH OPERATE IN THE FOLLOWING WAY--THERE IS A SENTENCE WHICH CANNOT BY ITSELF BE INTERPRETED BY THE ORDINARY SEMANTIC RULES. BASED ON THE GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF X, THE ENTAILMENT RULES WILL CONVERT X INTO A SET OF SENTENCES Y SUCH THAT EACH OF THESE SENTENCES CAN BE INTERPRETED BY THE ORDINARY SEMANTIC RULES. EXAMPLES OF SITUATIONS IN ENGLISH CALLING FOR ENTAILMENT RULES ARE GIVEN, NAMELY (1) THE USE OF VERBS LIKE "KNOW,""REALIZE," AND "BE AWARE," (2) USES OF THE WORD "EVEN" IN SIMPLE ASSERTIONS AND COMPARATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS, (3) THE VARIOUS TYPES OF CONDITIONAL SENTENCES, AND (4) THE SEMANTIC PROPERTIES OF PAIRS OF WORDS LIKE "COME" VERSUS "GO," AND "BRING" VERSUS "TAKE." THE CONCLUSION THAT A SEMANTIC THEORY NEEDS AT LEAST SOME RULES OF THE ENTAILMENT TYPE HAS INTRODUCED AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF SEMANTIC ANALYSIS. THIS ARTICLE APPEARS IN THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION PROJECT ON LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS, REPORT NUMBER 10. (IT)