italics? quotation marks? It's not really the complement of "say", so maybe italics is the way to go instead of quotation marks, but on the other hand, it feels like a complement of "say"

For actual quotations following verbs such as "say," decide whether to use single or double quotation marks.

For actual quotations following verbs such as "say," decide whether to use single or double quotation marks.

Non-parallel structure: coordination of two APs and a clause.

barring well-recognized exceptions such as "a book to sit down and read " or "shenanigans you can pull and not get fired".

... were chosen?

Standard English, since many nonstandard versions have "Her and me were chosen", etc.

Should the order be "conj X conj X"? Also, make specific reference to (5) in text or introduce with colon.

Make this remark parenthetical?

Double quotation marks are used to indicate words in the main text.

Follow a consistent style for mentioning words: single or double quotation marks.

You've switched from single quotation marks to double and now to italics. I would go with the italics, as that seems to be more standard in linguistics writing.

italics

Decide style for referring to actual (English) words, or words used to refer to a kind of relation, or words exemplified by English words ("however") but which are not to be taken as specific words.

...; for instance, ...

If you use quotation marks, the first one needs to be upside-down.

Delete

List in references.

don't capitalize

italicize, no quotation marks

no capitalization

italics, no quotation marks

specify that you will refer to coordinating conjunctions as "coordinators" for ease of reference.

With so much presentation of Steedman's CCG approach, it is easy for the novice to overlook this sentence announcing the intent to focus on this representational format. It is worth noting that there is a fair amount of literature in type-logical CG, the variety espoused by Morrill, Dowty, Moortgat, and others. Furthermore, it's not just a representational variation, but a different view of the role of rules in a grammar. The rules in a TLCG form a logical system, such that the operations of type-raising, composition, and others are derivable as theorems. I'm not suggesting doubling the size of this chapter by adding TLCG sections, but its existence, and your choice to focus on the CCG variety, should be highlighted so that interested readers can pursue the topic if they so desire.

Change comma to semicolon.

sermon

Change comma to semicolon.

Remove italics from category labels.

The same can be said for non-combinatory, type-logical CGs, in which type-raising and composition can be derived as theorems. See Dowty 1988 on non-constituent coordination.

The same is true of type-logical categorial grammars, as long as they have Associativity and introduction rules as well as elimination rules. The needed type-raising and composition rules can be derived as theorems.

Remove italics from category labels.

Remove italics from category labels.

Remove italics from category labels.

Explain what the double arrow means.

Remove italics from category labels.

Clarify that these strings are "Harry must have been eating" and "Harry devours".

replace comma with semicolon

replace with "in only requiring"

Dowty 1997 proposes a multimodal CG analysis with a "wrap" modality to handle precisely these cases.

Remove italics from category labels.

Remove italics in category labels.

Remove italics in category labels, and spaces before colons.

Remove italics and space before :

Remove italics Remove space before colon

At the very least, put a comma before "and". Better would be to start a new sentence: "...combinations. Even..."

Put comma after "semanticists".

Replace comma with semicolon.

replace with "...tree; however, it is..." or "...tree; it is, however, ..." I recommend the first way, because it involves fewer pauses.

Put "As in GB theory," at the beginning of the sentence. Where it is, it allows the interpretation that valence is encoded only once in CG, just as it's encoded only once in GB, and additionally, that this one-time encoding is in the lexicon, which may or may not be like GB.

Put a comma before "and" to reduce garden-path effect of "corpora and Briscoe".

Do they give credit for it, or is it a work of their own in process?

This sentence doesn't seem to belong in a paragraph about Categorial Grammar in General. It might go better in the next paragraph, with a clarification that Montague's works are not merely about semantics, but semantics tightly connected with syntax.