1: \begin{definition}\label{def:genparam} 

2: In the setting of Theorem \ref{thm:LC}, a triple $\Gamma =

3: (H,\gamma,R^+_{i{\mathbb R}})$ satisfying conditions (1)--(3) is

4: called a {\em continued Langlands parameter}.  The set of equivalence

5: classes of such parameters is written $\Pi_{\cont}(G)$.

6: 

7: Attached to each $\Gamma \in \Pi_{\cont}(G)$ there is a {\em continued

8:   standard (virtual) $({\mathfrak g}_0,K)$-module $I(\Gamma)$} of

9:   finite length.  (The construction of $I(\Gamma)$ involves some

10:   cohomological functors, and in this setting the functors may be

11:   nonzero in several different degrees. The virtual representation

12:   $I(\Gamma)$ is the alternating sum of these functors.)

13: 

14:   If in addition $\Gamma$ satisfies condition (4), then $\Gamma$ is

15:   called a {\em weak Langlands parameter}. The set of weak parameters

16:   is written $\Pi_{\weak}(G)$.

17: 

18: Under this hypothesis there

19:   is a vanishing theorem, and one can construct {\em weak standard

20:     $({\mathfrak g}_0,K)$-modules $I_{\quo}(\Gamma)$ and

21:     $I_{\sub}(\Gamma)$}.  A weak standard module is always a

22:   direct sum of a finite number (possibly zero) of standard

23:   modules. For any weak Langlands parameter $\Gamma$, we can therefore

24:   define {\em the Langlands quotient representation} $J(\Gamma)$ to be

25:   the corresponding direct sum of irreducible representations; this is

26:   the cosocle of $I_{\quo}(\Gamma)$, or equivalently the socle

27:   of $I_{\sub}(\Gamma)$.

28: 

29: If $\Gamma$ does not satisfy condition (4), then we do not know any

30: reasonable way to define $J(\Gamma)$.

31: \end{definition}