Chomsky's "loss of generality in the formulation of the rule-governed regularities of the language."

From a discussion about "loss of generality" on the Funknet discussion list (http://lloyd.emich.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0406&L=funknet&D=0&P=3622):

'The particular analysis which interests me is one I found in a historical
retrospective by Fritz Newmeyer and others "Chomsky's 1962 programme for
linguistics" (in Newmeyer's "Generative Linguistics -- A Historical
Perspective", Routledge, 1996, and apparently also published in "Proc. of the
XVth International Congress of Linguists".)

Newmeyer is talking mostly about Chomsky's "Logical basis of linguistic
theory" paper (presented at the Ninth Int. Congress of Linguists?) Chomsky's
argument as he presents it focused largely on phonology, and was
controversial because it attacked what was at the time "considered a
fundamental scientific insight: the centrality of the contrastive function of
linguistic elements."

...

But what was Chomsky's objection? According to Newmeyer "part of the
discussion of phonology in 'LBLT' is directed towards showing that the
conditions that were supposed to define a phonemic representation (including
complementary distribution, locally determined biuniqueness, linearity, etc.)
were inconsistent or incoherent in some cases and led to (or at least
allowed) absurd analyses in others." Most importantly the interposition of
such a "phonemic level ... led to a loss of generality in the formulation of
the rule-governed regularities of the language."'