THE ROLE OF PERCEPTUAL STRATEGIES IN THE PROCESSING
OF ENGLISH RELATIVE CLAUSE STRUCTURES
Gary D. P r i d e a u x
Department o f L i n g u i s t i c s
University of Alberta
Edmonton, A l b e r t a
Canada T6G 2H1
especially rich source for
experimental
study,
since English sanctions relative
clause
formation
on
NPs
p]ayinc
virtually
any g r a m m a t i c a l
role, while
the r e l a t i v e
pronoun
(RP)
can
itself
play a wide variety of grammatical roles
w i t h the r e l a t i v e
c l a u s e (RC).
For ar
English sentence containing a subject, a
transitive
v e r b , and a d i r e c t o b j e c t ,
a
relative
c l a u s e can be formed on e i t h e r
the subject
or
object
NP.
Moreover,
within
a relative
clause containing a
transitive
verb,
the
relative
pronour
can
itself
be s u b j e c t or o b j e c t .
For
such s e n t e n c e t y p e s , t h e f o l l o w i n g
four
structures
are p e r m i t t e d ,
assuming a
s i n g l e r e l a t i v e c l a u s e per s e n t e n c e :
Summary
In
order
to
assess c o m p e t i n g
p r e d i c t i o n s made by s e v e r a l
different
perceptual strategies,
an e x p e r i m e n t was
conducted,
using
as s t i m u l i
English
sentences containing a variety of types
of
relative
clauses.
The
results
indicated
that
of
all
the s t r a t e g i e s
investigated,
only
Word
Order
and
Interruption
played significant
roles in
the c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f the s e n t e n c e s .
A
similar
experiment
was then c o n d u c t e d
u s i n g dapanese s e n t e n c e s w i t h
relative
clauses,
and
exactly
the same two
s t r a t e g i e s were found t o a c c o u n t f o r the
data.
The Given-New s t r a t e g y was a l s o
found to p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e
in
the
two l a n g u a g e s .
SSa: NP[RP V NP] V NP
The man t h a t chased the dog saw
boy.
SOa: NP [RP NP V] V NP
The man t h a t the dog chased saw
boy.
OSa: NP V NP[RP V NP]
The man saw the boy t h a t chased
dog.
OOa: NP V NP[RP NP V]
The man saw the boy t h a t the
chased.
Introduction
Over the p a s t few y e a r s , f u n c t i o n a l
considerations
have come t o p l a y
an
i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n the e m p i r i c a l s t u d y o f
language c o m p r e h e n s i o n p r o c e s s e s .
This
functional
perspective
assumes
that
hearers
employ a s e t
of perceptual, ~
mental, 2 or
cognitive
strategies
to
extract
semantic
information
directly
from s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e .
Throughout
the
psycholinguistic
literature,
a wide
v a r i e t y o f s t r a t e g i e s has been p r o p o s e d ,
some w i t h
a syntactic orientation,
and
others
having a semantic or
even a
discourse
basis.
Moreover,
some
strategies
appear
to
be
language
specific,
while
others
are
language
independent.
The term
"perceptual"
is
somewhat
inappropriate
in this context
s i n c e the p r o c e s s e s
involved
typically
do n o t
r e f e r to p e r c e p t i o n i n even i t s
most g e n e r a l sense.
The more apt
term
" c o g n i t i v e " w i l l be used t h r o u g h o u t t h i s
paper.
the
the
the
dog
In the c o d i n g t o the l e f t
of
each
structure,
the
first
letter represents
the g r a m m a t i c a l r o l e ( s u b j e c t o r o b j e c t )
of
the NP on w h i c h the r e l a t i v e
clause
is
formed,
while
the second
letter
represents
the g r a m m a t i c a l r o l e p l a y e d
by the r e l a t i v e
pronoun.
The t h i r d
letter
represents
the
fact
that
the
relative
c l a u s e i s i n the a c t i v e v o i c e .
A parallel
s e t o f s t r u c t u r e s can be
c o n s t r u c t e d i n w h i c h the r e l a t i v e
clause
i s i n the p a s s i v e v o i c e .
These a r e :
SSp: NP[RP be Ved by NP] V NP
The man t h a t was chased by the dog
saw the boy.
SOp: NP[RP NP be Ved by] V NP
The man t h a t t h e dog was chased by
saw the boy.
OSp: NP V NP[RP be Ved by NP]
In o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h the v i a b i l i t y
and
relative
importance of
various
strategies,
both
simplex
and complex
sentences
have
been
investigated
experimentally.
English
sentences
containing
relative
c l a u s e s p r o v i d e an
60
was
later
found 9 t o
be
far
less
operative
for
adults.
There are twc
fundamental
problems
associated
with
this
strategy.
The f i r s t
is that it is
not c l e a r w h e t h e r p a r a l l e l
function
is
to be d e f i n e d on u n d e r l y i n g o r s u r f a c e
grammatical
roles.
In
the
passives
listed
above, s u r f a c e g r a m m a t i c a l r o l e s
are i n d i c a t e d
for
all
NPs,
including
relative
pronouns.
However,
each o f
those could
also
be
interpreted
in
underlying
terms.
For example,
the
r e l a t i v e p r o n o u n i s c o n s t r u e d as s u b j e c t
in
t y p e SSp, a l t h o u g h i n deep s t r u c t u r e
terms i t i s the o b j e c t .
Consequently,
two d i s t i n c t
versions
o f the s t r a t e g y
are p o s s i b l e ,
one based on
surface
grammatical
relations
and t h e o t h e r
based on u n d e r l y i n g
relations.
Both
versions
are
tested
here.
The second
problem is
conceptual
in nature,
In
particular,
the s t r a t e g y seems t o l a c k
any e x p l a n a t o r y power, s t a n d i n g o n l y
as
an
isolated
statement
of
certain
results, without independent motivation.
In
fact,
even i t s
relevance
f o r the
acquisition
d a t a has been c h a l l e n g e d . 7
The man saw the Doy t h a t was chased
by the dog.
OOp: NP V NP[RP NP be Ved by]
The man saw the boy t h a t the dog
was chased by.
Several
strategies
have
beery
proposed t o a c c o u n t f o r the d i f f e r e n t i a l
ease
of
processing
of
structures
containing
relative
clauses,
a~though
most p r o p o s a l s
have c o n c e n t r a t e d
on
actives
and have n o t
addressed
the
problem of
passive
relative
clauses,
When
these
strategies
are g a t h e r e d
t o g e t h e r , however,
it
becomes o b v i o u s
that
t h e y make d i f f e r e n t
predictions.
The o r i g i n a l
purpose of
the
research
reported
h e r e was t o e v a l u a t e
four
i m p o r t a n t s t r a t e g i e s b e a r i n g on r e l a t i v e
clause processing, in
the c o n t e x t o f a
s i n g l e e x p e r i m e n t w i t h s t i m u l i based on
the e i g h t
structures
d i s c u s s e d above.
The i n c o r p o r a t i o n
of
passive
relative
clauses
was
an
important
added
dimension,
since
it
is
the passives
which
serve
to differentiate
among the
strategies.
A related
goal
was
to
eliminate
from
consideration
those
strategies for which empirical
support
was not
forthcoming.
A f i n a l goal was
to e s t a b l i s h
a hierarchy
among
the
relevant strategies.
Both
the
Word
Order
and
Interruption
s t r a t e g i e s were p r o p o s e d 1°
t o deal
with
language
acquisition
phenomena,
but
b o t h can r e a d i l y
be
translated
into
processing
terms,
as
t h e y have been h e r e .
Clearly, neither
i s language s p e c i f i c ,
a l t h o u g h t h e Word
Order
s t r a t e g y assumes the e x i s t e n c e o f
a "basic"
or
"normal"
word
order,
usually
assumed t o be t h a t
of
the
simple,
declarative,
affirmative
sentence.
On q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t g r o u n d s ,
Givon 4 has argued
that
the
simple,
declarative,
affirmative
sentence type
i s the most b a s i c i n many, i f
not
all,
languages
precisely
because
it
is
presuppositionally
the
least
burdened
type.
The Word Order s t r a t e g y p r e d i c t s
t h a t any c l a u s e w h i c h d e v i a t e s from
the
normal
form w i l l
be more d i f f i c u l t
to
p r o c e s s than one w h i c h does n o t .
The
Interruption
s t r a t e g y p r e d i c t s t h a t any
sentence with
an i n t e r n a l l y
embedded
(interrupting)
clause
will
be more
difficult
t o p r o c e s s than one w i t h
an
embedded c l a u s e at one e x t r e m i t y or t h e
other,
The following cognitive strategies
are a l l r e l e v a n t to
the p r o c e s s i n g
of
sentences containing relative
clauses:
She
Parallel
Function
(PF)
Strategy.
Comprehension f o r
sentences
containing
relative
clauses
is
facilitated
if
the r e l a t i v e
pronoun
p l a y s the same g r a m m a t i c a l r o l e (S or O)
as i s p l a y e d by the m o d i f i e d noun. 8
The
Interruption
Strategy.
A
non-interrupted
clause
is
easier
to
comprehend than an i n t e r r u p t e d c l a u s e . ~°
The Word Order S t r a t e q y .
in
normal
word o r d e r
is
comprehend t h a n a c l a u s e
in
word o r d e r . I°
A clause
easier
to
non-normal
The A d j a c e n c y S t r a t e g y .
In p a r s i n g
a noncompound s e n t e n c e , s t a r t
from
the
left
and g r o u p t o g e t h e r as c o n s t i t u e n t s
o f the same c l a u s e
two a d j a c e n t
NPs
(i.e.,
t h o s e not
s e p a r a t e d by a n o t h e r
NP) and an a d j a c e n t
verb
not
already
assigned
to
a clause.
Interpret
the
first
NP as t h e s u b j e c t and t h e second
NP as the o b j e c t o f t h e v e r b . e
Sheldon e n o t e d t h a t
the A d j a c e n c y
s t r a t e g y i s b a s i c a l l y an E n g l i s h p a r s i n g
device which applies
blindly
across
a
s e n t e n c e from l e f t t o r i g h t , a s s i g n i n g a
s u r f a c e g r a m m a t i c a l r o l e t o each f u l l NP
it
encounters,
and
leaving
relative
pronouns unanalyzed.
She p o i n t e d
out
that
the
strategy
sometimes
f a i l s to
assign grammatical roles correctly.
For
example,
in
an SSa s e n t e n c e l i k e "The
The P a r a l l e l F u n c t i o n s t r a t e g y was
initially
proposed 8 to
account
for
English
acquisition
data,
a]thouqh it
61
man t h a t chased the dog saw the boy,
the
s t r a t e g y a s s i g n s The man as s u b j e c t
o f chased and the doq as o b j e c t .
It
then
skips
over
that
and i n c o r r e c t l y
a s s i g n s the doq as s u b j e c t o f
saw,
and
fina]]y
specifies
the boy as o b j e c t .
Thus, the A d j a c e n c y s t r a t e g y
makes one
error
for
type SSa.
She]don 9 s u g g e s t s
t h a t the number o f e r r o r s
made by the
strategy
determines
the
relative
processing difficulty
of
that
type of
structure.
The n a t u r a l n e s s d a t a were a n a l y z e d
on the U n i v e r s i t y
o f A l b e r t a ' s Amdahl
470V/5 c o m p u t e r ,
using
a
packaged
(BMD:O8V) t h r e e - w a y a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e
program, w i t h the f a c t o r s
of
subjects,
s y n t a c t i c t y p e ( f o u r ] e v e ] s : SS, SO, OS,
0 0 ) , and v__gQice (two 1 e v e ] s :
active
and
passive).
All
the main e f f e c t s were
significant
(~<.01),
but
more
importantly
the
type
by
voice
interaction
was a l s o h i g h ] y
significant
(F(3,51)=20.48,
E<.O01),
with
the
sentences containing
active
relative
clauses
judged
significantly
more
natural than those containing passive
relative clauses.
Consequently, the two
groups
were
analyzed
separately.
Planned comparisons were carried out on
each group
to determine which
types
within each group were judged
to be
significantly the more natural.
Each of
the five strategies was tested within
the two groups.
Within
the
group
containing
active relative clauses, the
only
significant
factor
was
Interruption,
with
types
OOa and OSa
judged significantly
more n a t u r a l
than
SSa and SOa ( F ( 3 , 1 1 9 ) = 1 4 , 2 7 , ~ < . 0 0 1 ) .
None o f
the
Uther
strategies
was
operative in this group.
Each s t r a t e g y g e n e r a t e s p r e d i c t i o n s
as to t h e ease o f
processing
of
the
eight
sentence types.
I f b o t h Deep and
Surface versions
of
Para]]el
Function
are
tested,
five
sets of predictions
follow.
These are l i s t e d
in
Table
1,
where
">"
signifies
"is
easier
to
comprehend t h a n "
or
"is
more n a t u r a l
than."
TABLE I. PREDICTIONS FOR EACH STRATEGY
Strateqy
Predictions
Deep PF
SSa,SOp,OOa,OSp >
SOa,SSp,OSa,OOp
S u r f a c e PF
SSa,OOa,SSp,OOp >
OSa,SOa,OSp,SOp
Interruption
OOa,OSa,OSp,OOp >
SOa,SSa,SSp,SOp
Word Order
SSa,OSa,SSp,OSp >
SOa,OOa,SOp,OOp
Adjacency
OSp,OSa
>
SSa,OOa,SSp,OOp >
SOa,SOp
The E n g l i s h
W i t h i n the g r o u p c o n t a i n i n g p a s s i v e
relative
c l a u s e s ~ the o n l y
significant
factor
was Word O r d e r .
The types OSp
and SSp, w h i c h have a r e l a t i v e
clause
word
order
of
SVO,
were
judged
significantly
e a s i e r than t y p e s SOp and
OOp, w h i c h have r e l a t i v e
c l a u s e word
o r d e r o f OSV ( L ( 3 , 1 1 9 ) = 6 4 . 6 0 ,
~<.001).
These r e s u l t s
are
all
summarized
in
T a b l e 2.
TABLE 2. ENGLISH NATURALNESS dUDGEMENTS
Experiment
In o r d e r t o t e s t the p r e d i c t i o n s ,
a
s i n g l e e x p e r i m e n t was c o n d u c t e d u s i n g as
stimuli
56 s e n t e n c e s
i n w r i t t e n form,
with
seven
separate
tokens
(replications)
of
each o f
the eight
types.
The l e x i c a l
i t e m s were v a r i e d
across
all
the s e n t e n c e s .
The t a s k o f
the s u b j e c t s , e i g h t e e n
native
speakers
of
E n g l i s h , was t o e v a l u a t e each o f the
s e n t e n c e s i n terms o f r e l a t i v e
ease o f
comprehension
or
naturalness
on a
nine-point
scale,
with
"1"
the most
n a t u r a l o r e a s i e s t t o u n d e r s t a n d and "9"
the l e a s t .
S u b j e c t s were p e r m i t t e d t o
work at
t h e i r own r a t e s and were urged
to i g n o r e as f a r as p o s s i b l e the a c t u a l
lexical
items, focusing their attention
r a t h e r on the forms o f the s e n t e n c e s .
Voice
Naturalness
Type
Active
1
OSa
OOa
SOa
SSa
S[OSV] 0 V
S[SVO] V 0
OSp
SSp
OOp
SOp
S V O[SVO]
S[SVO] V 0
S V O[OSV]
S[OSV] V O
2
Passive
3
4
Word Order
S V O[SVO]
S V O[OSV]
Interpretation
The first question
to address
in
interpreting
these data
is why those
sentences containing
passive relative
c]auses were
judged significantly more
complex and
less natural
than those
containing active relat4ves.
To unravel
62
-
and o b j e c t as p a t i e n t ,
Furthermore, the
subject
of
an a c t i v e
is
typically
definite
and G i v e n , w h i l e the o b j e c t
is
less
likely
t o be d e f i n i t e
and more
likely
to be New i n f o r m a t i o n ,
The
passive,
on the o t h e r
hand,
has a
definite,
non-agentive, typically
Given
subject
and i f i t has an o b j e c t at a l l ,
the o b j e c t i s a g e n t , t y p i c a l l y
definite,
and New.
The d i f f e r e n c e s are c l e a r l y
signalled
by
the
word
order
and
morphological
factors
associated
with
the p a s s i v e .
Consequently,
it
would
appear t h a t the g l o b a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of
v o i c e has a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t a h o s t
of
syntactic,
semantic,
and
discourse
properties,
w i t h the p a s s i v e
being
by
far
the more "marked" and l e s s e x p e c t e d
form.
t h i s complex i s s u e , i t i s i n s t r u c t i v e
to
examine s e v e r a l f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
the a c t i v e / p a s s i v e d i s t i n c t i o n .
Within
an a c t i v e
clause,
the
subject
of
a
transitive
action
verb
is
typically,
although
not a l w a y s , i n t e r p r e t a b l e
as a
semantic agent, while for
the passive,
i t i s c e r t a i n t h a t the s u b j e c t i s n o t an
agent.
In f a c t ,
Givon 4 has s u g g e s t e d
that
an
important
function
of
the
passive
construction
is
to place
a
non-agent
NP i n t o s u b j e c t p o s i t i o n .
A
passive clause therefore
deviates
from
the " n o r m a l " case o f s u b j e c t as s e m a n t i c
agent.
Consequently, while both
active
and p a s s i v e c l a u s e s can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d
as h a v i n g a s u r f a c e SVO word o r d e r ,
the
s u b j e c t o f t h e p a s s i v e i s n o n - a g e n t , and
the o b j e c t
is
the
object
of
the
p r e p o s i t i o n .b_~.
Once the
two g r o u p s have
been
separated
by v o i c e , we can examine t h e
factors within
each g r o u p w h i c h g i v e
rise
to
further
subgroupings.
Within
the a c t i v e s , t h e
Interruption
strategy
separates
the
four
groups
into
two,
d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t c o m p r e h e n s i o n i s more
difficult
when
a
relative
clause
interrupts
the main c l a u s e .
Within
the
passives,
Word
Order was t h e o n l y
significant
factor: a passive
relative
clause
with
SVO word o r d e r was j u d g e d
e a s i e r t o comprehend t h a n one w i t h
an
OSV word o r d e r .
Interruption
p l a y e d no
role
among t h e s u b g r o u p i n g s o f
the
passives.
Another
important
difference
is
t h a t p a s s i v e s are f a r l e s s f r e q u e n t t h a n
actives.
I n d i s c u s s i n g t e x t c o u n t s made
over a broad spectrum of genres,
Givon 4
reported
that
some
90%
of
the
affirmative,
declarative
s e n t e n c e s were
actives,
and o n l y
10% were p a s s i v e s .
F u r t h e r m o r e , o n l y 20% o f the l a t t e r were
"full"
passives
w i t h o v e r t a g e n t i v e b~
phrases,
while
80%
were
truncated
passives.
Accordingly,
only
2% o f
affirmative,
declarative
sentences
are
"full"
passives.
Givon 4 suggested the
special
discourse
properties
and
presuppositions
associated
with
the
passive might
account
for
their
low
frequency.
For example, the s u b j e c t o f
a passive
clause
is
not
a potential
agent,
b u t i s more t y p i c a l l y
a semantic
patient.
However,
the
subjects
of
declarative
sentences
tend
to contain
G i v e n i n f o r m a t i o n , w i t h the o b j e c t s more
l i k e l y t o be New.
T h i s f o l l o w s from the
Given-New s t r a t e g y , 2 a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h
Given
i n f o r m a t i o n n o r m a l l y p r e c e d e s New
in a sentence.
Some 90% o f t h e s u b j e c t
NPs i n
active
s e n t e n c e s are d e f i n i t e ,
w h i l e 93% o f t h e s u b j e c t NPs o f
passive
s e n t e n c e s are d e f i n i t e . 4 In g e n e r a l ,
t h e n , the s u b j e c t s o f
both
active
and
passive
sentences
tend
t o be d e f i n i t e
and
Given.
In
active
sentences,
however,
only
about
56% o f t h e d i r e c t
o b j e c t NPs are d e f i n i t e ,
and t h e d i r e c t
o b j e c t i s f a r more l i k e l y t o c o n t a i n New
information
than
is
the
subject.
Similarly,
if
t h e r e i s an o v e r t o b j e c t
(agentive) phrase in a passive,
it
is
a l m o s t i n v a r i a b l y New i n f o r m a t i o n .
The
experiment
demonstrated
the
importance of
Interruption
and
Word
Order, while neither version of Parallel
Function
nor
Adjacency
emerged
as
significant.
However, t h e two o p e r a t i v e
s t r a t e g i e s are n o t e q u a l l y s a l i e n t ,
and
in
particular,
it
appears
that
Interruption
is important only
for
the
active
structures,
i n w h i c h the normal
e x p e c t a t i o n o f s u b j e c t as agent i s met.
For the n o n - n o r m a l ( p a s s i v e ~ c a s e s , Word
Order i s v e r y i m p o r t a n t .
Consequently,
it
appears
that
Word Order must be
satisfied
before
Interruption
can be
called into play.
At
this
point,
something further
must be s a i d about the consequences o f
t h e Given-New s t r a t e g y w i t h i n r e l a t i v e
clauses.
S i n c e i t has an a n t e c e d e n t ,
a
relative
pronoun
typically
represents
Given information.
Consequently,
in
a
r e . ] a t i v e c l a u s e w i t h the s t r u c t u r e
[RP V
NP], the r e l a t i v e
p r o n o u n i s s u b j e c t and
i s i n the p o s i t i o n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Given
information.
For
relative
clause
structures
of
the
form [RP NP V], t h e
relative
pronoun is again the
first
NP
in
t h e c l a u s e , and s a t i s f i e s
the Given
Based on t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s , w e can
extract
the
following
general
facts
concerning
the
distinction
between
a c t i v e and p a s s i v e c l a u s e s .
A c t i v e s are
more f r e q u e n t ,
have s u b j e c t as a n e n t ,
63
C o n s e q u e n t l y , w i t h i n the a c t i v e
group,
the Given-New s t r a t e g y m i g h t be viewed
as a " f o r c e ''3 f a v o r i n g
structures
with
the
r e l a t i v e c l a u s e s on the s u b j e c t NP,
while
Interruption
w o u l d be a f o r c e
favoring
structures
with
relative
clauses
on o b j e c t
NPs.
Accordingly,
these
two f o r c e s
are
in competition
within
the a c t i v e s .
In
the p a s s i v e
group,
however, the Word Order s t r a t e g y
f a v o r s r e l a t i v e c l a u s e s o f the form SVO,
and the
Given-New s t r a t e g y a l s o f a v o r s
such
structures.
Here,
the
two
s t r a t e g i e s work t o g e t h e r .
position.
Furthermore, it is just
this
Given
RP w h i c h can be s u c c e s s f u l l y
deleted.
However, the s u b j e c t NP, w h i c h
is also typically
Given i n f o r m a t i o n , now
finds
itself
in
the
New
position,
according
to
the Given-New s t r a t e g y .
Consequently,
this
type of
relative
clause
structure,
w i t h word o r d e r OSV,
m i g h t be e x p e c t e d to be somewhat
less
natural
in
terms o f
the Given-New
strategy,
than the f o r m e r , w i t h the word
order
SVO.
No
such
significant
difference
was found
in
these data,
although
such a r e s u l t was r e p o r t e d by
Lynkowsky, 6 who c o n d u c t e d
a
similar
experiment,
but
used
only
active
relative clauses.
I n her
experiment,
there
was
no
deviation
from
the
expected,
normal
case o f
subject
as
potential
agent,
and c o n s e q u e n t l y
it
w o u l d be e x p e c t e d t h a t the d o m i n a n t Word
Order
strategy
w o u l d be the
first
s t r a t e g y t o be c a l l e d i n t o o p e r a t i o n .
The Japanese E x p e r i m e n t
At t h i s p o i n t , b r i e f
mention will
be made o f a Japanese e x p e r i m e n t s i m i l a r
to t h e one r e p o r t e d above, b u t
focusing
only
on a c t i v e
relative clauses,
The
same m e t h o d o l o g y was employed,
with
24
native
s p e a k e r s o f Japanese s e r v i n g as
subjects.
The s t i m u l i
were
twelve
sentences,
with
three
replications
of
four
types.
Japanese
is
an
SOY
language,
and
the
relative
clause
p r e c e d e s the m o d i f i e d NP.
Furthermore,
Japanese r e l a t i v e c l a u s e s do n o t c o n t a i n
relative pronouns,
but
rather
exhibit
deletion
of
the r e ] a t i v i z e d
NP.
The
f o l l o w i n g f o u r s t r u c t u r e s were t e s t e d :
W i t h i n the p a s s i v e g r o u p , the i s s u e
is
somewhat more complex.
The p a s s i v e
r e l a t i v e c l a u s e s can have one o f
two
forms,
either
[RP be Ved by NP], w i t h
the word o r d e r o f SVO, o r [RP NP be Ved
by],
with
an OSV word o r d e r .
In b o t h
c a s e s , the normal e x p e c t a t i o n o f s u b j e c t
as agent
is
violated.
The r e s u l t s o f
the e x p e r i m e n t i n d i c a t e t h a t i t
is
the
former,
S V O , p a s s i v e s w h i c h are j u d g e d
f a r more n a t u r a l than
the
latter,
OSV
structures.
In
terms o f the Given-New
strategy,
t h i s makes a g r e a t
deal
of
sense.
In
the
SVO case, the r e l a t i v e
p r o q o u n appears
to be Given
for
two
reasons:
it
is
a s u b j e c t and i t i s a
relative
pronoun.
The
agentive
NP
object
is
precisely
where
New
i n f o r m a t i o n s h o u l d be.
In the OSV case,
however,
the r e l a t i v e p r o n o u n s h o u l d be
Given s i n c e i t i s
a relative
pronoun,
but
it
s h o u l d be New s i n c e i t i s t h e
object
of
the
preposition
..~.
Furthermore,
the s u b j e c t
NP i s i n the
New p o s i t i o n ,
b u t as s u b j e c t
it
should
be G i v e n .
C o n s e q u e n t l y , the Given-New
s t r a t e g y seems t o be w o r k i n g
against
itself
in
the p a s s i v e r e l a t i v e c l a u s e s
w i t h OSV word o r d e r ,
SS
SO
OS
O0
One f i n a l a s p e c t o f
the Given-New
factor
must
also
be
mentioned.
Typically,
definite
NPs are c o n s t r u e d as
Given
information.
In the s t i m u l i f o r
the p r e s e n t e x p e r i m e n t , however, a11 NPs
were d e f i n i t e .
If a relative
clause is
formed on a d e f i n i t e
NP, t h e r e may be a
tendency
to v i e w the r e l a t i v e
c l a u s e as
adding
to
the
definiteness
or
specificity
o f the NP, t h e r e b y making i t
even more " G i v e n , " r e g a r d l e s s
of
where
it
is
placed
in
the
sentence.
[NP+o V]NP+ga NP+o V
okane o m i t s u k e t a o t o k o ga s h a r e i o
moratta
money OM found man SM r e w a r d OM
received
"The man who found
the
money
r e c e i v e d the r e w a r d . "
[NP+ga V]NP+ga NP+o V
kodomo ga k a r a k a t t a
inu gate o
kanda
c h i l d SM t e a s e d dog SM hand OM b i t
"The dog t h a t t h e c h i l d t e a s e d b i t
(his) hand."
NP+ga [NP+o V]NP+o V
s h o o j o ga sakana o t a b e t a n e r o o
tataita
girl
SM f i s h OM a t e c a t OM spanked.
"The g i r l spanked the c a t t h a t
ate
the fish."
NP+ga [NP÷ga V]NP+o V
gakusei
ga k y o o j u
ga k a i t a hon o
yonda
s t u d e n t SM p r o f e s s o r SM w r o t e
book
OM read
"The s t u d e n t read the book t h a t t h e
professor wrote."
The d a t a were a n a l y z e d on
the
University
of
Alberta's
Amdah] 470V/6
computer,
using
the
BMD:O8V two-way
analysis
of
variance
program w i t h
s u b j e c t . s and t y p e s ( f o u r l e v e l s : SS, SO,
OS,
00)
as
factors.
The
only
64
s u p p o r t the c r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c
viability
of
the Word O r d e r ,
Interruption,
and
Given-New s t r a t e g i e s .
significant
factor
was t y p e
(~(3,69)=
115.54,
~<,001).
Planned c o m p a r i s o n s
were used to
test
for
each o f
the
strategies
except
for
the
English-specific
Adjacency
strategy.
The
first
comparison
indicated
that
types
SS and OS were
significantly
easier
and more n a t u r a l than t y p e s SO
and O0 ( F ( 3 , 6 9 ) = 3 1 8 . 2 7 , ~ < . 0 0 1 ) .
There
was no s T g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between O0
and
SO,
although
type
SS
was
significantly
easier
than
OS
(L(3,69)=28.25, ~<.001).
These r e s u l t s
are r e p r e s e n t e d i n Table 3.
TABLE 3,
Conclusions
Originally,
this
research
was
u n d e r t a k e n i n an a t t e m p t
to
sort
out
competing
cognitive strategies relevant
to the p r o c e s s i n g o f
complex
sentences
with
relative
clauses.
That goal was
a c h i e v e d , and the
importance
of
both
Word
Order
and
Interruption
was
demonstrated,
while
both
versions
of
Parallel
Function
and A d j a c e n c y were
rejected.
However,
other
strategies
were a l s o
found
to be o p e r a b l e .
The
semantic
strategy
which
associates
subject
w i t h agent i s i n f a c t a v e r s i o n
o f Word O r d e r .
I n a d d i t i o n , and perhaps
most i m p o r t a n t l y ,
the Given-New s t r a t e g y
was f o u n d to be o f
extreme
importance,
both
for
English
and f o r
Japanese.
Finally,
a hierarchy of
strategies
has
suggested
itself.
The
Given-New
strategy
is
obviously
of
great
i m p o r t a n c e f o r s e n t e n c e s i n c o n t e x t , and
a l t h o u g h the s t i m u l i
used i n
the two
studies
r e p o r t e d here were p r e s e n t e d i n
isolation,
the s t r a t e g y s t i l l
seems t o
be o p e r a t i v e .
Furthermore,
within
a
particular
sentence,
it
appears
that
Word Order c r i t e r i a
must be s a t i s f i e d
before Interruption
i s employed.
JAPANESE NATURALNESS dUDGEMENTS
Naturalness
Type
Word Order
1
ss
[0v]s 0 v
2
OS
S [OV]O V
3
O0
s0
S [SV]O V
[sv] 0 v
The f a c t o r s e p a r a t i n g t h e f i r s t
two
types
from
the
second p a i r i s c l e a r l y
Word
Order:
sentences
containing
relative
c l a u s e s w i t h OV word o r d e r are
p r e f e r r e d over t h o s e c o n t a i n i n g r e l a t i v e
clauses
with
the
SV
word o r d e r .
Moreover, within the pair containing
OV
relative
clauses,
Interruption
determined that the non-interrupted
SS
t y p e was p r e f e r r e d o v e r t h e i n t e r r u p t e d
OS t y p e .
C o n s e q u e n t l y , i n dapanese,
as
in
English,
t h e Word Order s t r a t e g y i s
t h e more
important
of
the
two,
with
Interruption
only called into operation
when t h e normal word o r d e r i s met,
In
her s t u d y o f t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f compound
and complex s e n t e n c e s
in
dapanese,
Kawashima 5
found
that
left-branching
s t r u c t u r e s were m a s t e r e d b e f o r e
those
containing
center
embeddings,
thus
supporting
Interruption
as t h e major
factor
in
the
acquisition of relative
clauses.
There are s t i l l
numerous l o o s e ends
t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d .
The d e f i n i t e n e s s o f
NPs must be v a r i e d
experimentally
to
tighten
up the
tentative
suggestions
concerning
the G i v e n n e s s o f
definite
NPs; s e n t e n c e s must be c a r e f u l l y
studied
in contexts;
text
counts
should
be
undertaken
to establish the proportion
of relative
c l a u s e s and t h e i r p o s i t i o n s ,
in
accordance with
such f a c t o r s
as
definiteness,
Interruption,
and
the
Given-New s t r a t e g y .
The p r e s e n t s t u d y
has o n l y s c r a t c h e d the s u r f a c e ,
but
at
least
the r e s u l t s
are e n c o u r a g i n g i n
that they accord we]]
across
two v e r y
different
languages,
providing a start
on the p r o b l e m o f
the
interaction
of
cognitive strategies.
Only s p e c u l a t i o n can be o f f e r e d
as
to why the OV word o r d e r i s p r e f e r r e d t o
t h e SV.
dapanese, l i k e E n g l i s h , appears
to obey the Given-New s t r a t e g y ,
but
unlike
English;
Japanese p e r m i t s
the
omission
of
an " u n d e r s t o o d "
(e.g.,
Given)
NP, making
sentences
without
overt
subjects
quite
common.
Within
relative
c l a u s e s , the Given, r e l a t i v i z e d
NP i s o m i t t e d .
But s i n c e Given s u b j e c t s
may a l s o be o m i t t e d , i t f o l l o w s t h a t t h e
OV c l a u s e t y p e w o u l d be more n a t u r a l and
common than the SV t y p e when the v e r b i s
transitive.
I n s h o r t , the Japanese d a t a
Acknowledqemen.ts
I am g r a t e f u l
to Wm. J.
Baker
for
his
comments and a d v i c e
in matters
statistical,
to Matthew S. D r y e r f o r h i s
insightful
metaphor
of
competing
s t r a t e g i e s as " f o r c e s , " and t o M i c h i k o
Kawashima f o r
collecting
the dapanese
data.
I am r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a l l
errors.
This manuscript
was f o r m a t t e d
on the
U n i v e r s i t y o f A l b e r t a " T e x t f o r m " system.
65-
References
I.
Bever,
T. G. The c o g n i t i v e b a s i s
for
linguistic
structures.
In
d,
R. Hayes ( E d . ) ,
C o q n i t i o n and the
development o_.f_ language.
New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1970, 279-352.
2.
Clark,
H. H.,
& Clark,
E. V.
Psychology and language: An. i n t r o d u c t i o n
t_9"
psycholinquistics.
New
York:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.
3.
Dryer,
M,
S.
The
positional
tendencies of s e n t e n t i a l noun phrases in
u n i v e r s a l grammar.
Canadian Journal
of
L i n g u i s t i c s , forthcoming.
4.
Givon, T. O.._O.u n d e r s t a n d i n g qramrnar.
New York: Academic Press, 1979.
5.
Kawashima, M.
The a c q u i s i t i o n
o_.f.
Japanese r e l a . t i v e c l a u s e s .
Unpublished
M. Sc. Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y
of A l b e r t a ,
1980.
6.
LynKowsKy, P. E. The development o.j_
relative
clauses:
Comprehension
strategies
i__.n English and UKrainian.
Unpublished
Ph.
D.
dissertation,
U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1980.
7.
Prideaux, G. D. The a c q u i s i t i o n of
re]ative clauses: A functional analysis.
Canadian dournal o.j. L i n g u i s t i c s ,
19?9,
24, 25"40.
8.
Sheldon, A . The r o l e of p a r a l l e l
function
in the a c q u i s i t i o n of r e l a t i v e
clauses in E n g l i s h .
dournal of
Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974, 13,
272-281.
9.
Sheldon,
A.
On s t r a t e g i e s
for
processing
relative
clauses:
A
comparison of c h i l d r e n
and
adults.
Journal
of
Psycholinquistic
Research,
1977i 6, 305-318.
10,
Slobin,
D.
I.
Cognitive
prerequisites
for
the development of
language.
In
C.
A.
Ferguson
&
D. I.
Slobin
( E d s . ) , Studies of c h i l d
]anquaqe development.
New York:
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1973, 175-208.
-66