Computational Pitfalls in Tractable Grammatical Formalisms Marten Trautwein Abstract: In this dissertation we apply complexity theory to various grammatical formalisms. We presuppose that the reader has basic knowledge of the formal aspects of linguistics and the formal language theory. Familiarity with the rudiments of complexity theory is required to fully understand the material that that we present. The merit of applying complexity theory to grammatical formalisms is that the complexity analyses provide different kinds of information. The complexity analyses do not only show whether a problem is difficult, but also why it is difficult and possibly even how to restrict the problem in order to make it less difficult. The effect of the complexity analyses are twofold. On the one hand, the analyses provide statements concerning the development of the theory of the grammatical formalisms. On the other hand, the analyses express general statements concerning implementations of these grammatical formalisms. In this dissertation the main emphasis lies on the development of theories. Chapter 1 motivates our approach to the complexity analyses of grammatical formalisms. This approach is based on the descriptions of grammatical formalisms as they appear in actual practice. Chapter 2 studies "restricted attribute-value grammars" (R-AVGs). We introduce a liberal variation on the well-known "off-line parsability constraint," the "honest parsability constraint." We prove that the R-AVGs that satisfy this liberal constraint generate precisely all sets in the complexity class NP. This provides a direct link between weak generative capacity and complexity. In Chapter 3 we introduce "Categorial Unification Grammar" (CUG) and analyze its complexity. We prove that the recognition problem of CUG is NP-complete. By means of this complexity result we settle the weak generative capacity of CUG. We show that "Functional Unification Grammar" (FUG), "Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar" (HPSG), and "Lexical Functional Grammar" (LFG) can simulate CUG (Chapters 4,5, and 6). Furthermore, the recognition problems of these grammatical formalisms are shown to be NP-complete. The weak generative capacity of these grammatical formalisms follows from these simulations and complexity results. Chapter 7 handles "Functional Grammar" (FG). We introduce FG by means of many examples that clarify the relevant parts. Four processes are distinguished within the generation process of FG: the "fund formation process," the "clause structure formation process," the "form specification process," and the "order specification process." These four processes are considered one afterthe other. We formulate each process as a decision problem, and determine its complexity. Finally, Chapter 8 contains our overall conclusions and suggests directions for further research.