After many successes, statistical approaches that have been popular in the parsing community are now making headway into Natural Language Generation (NLG). These systems are aimed mainly at surface realization, and promise the same advantages that make statistics valuable for parsing: robustness, wide coverage and domain independence. A recent experiment aimed to empirically verify the linguistic coverage for such a statistical surface realization component by generating transformed sentences from the Penn TreeBank corpus. This article presents the empirical results of a similar experiment to evaluate the coverage of a purely symbolic surface realizer. We present the problems facing a symbolic approach on the same task, describe the results of its evaluation, and contrast them with the results of the statistical method to help quantitatively determine the level of coverage currently obtained by NLG surface realizers. 1