Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:50:34.073Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The processing of Japanese relative clauses1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Gary D. Prideaux
Gary D. Prideaux*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Over the past several years, a considerable amount of research on language comprehension has been carried out under the assumption that comprehension crucially involves language-independent cognitive strategies interacting with grammatical properties specific to a given language. Accordingly, the two factors of grammatical structure and cognitive strategies interact to render certain structures relatively more difficult to process than others. For example, it has been suggested that centre-embedded structures are more difficult to process than right-branching structures because centre-embedding interrupts the main clause and imposes a burden on short term memory, thereby making it relatively more difficult for the hearer to obtain closure on the entire sentence (Kuno 1974). Much attention within the cognitive strategies paradigm has been addressed to the comprehension of English complex sentences, and in particular to those sentences containing relative clauses. Since English permits relative clauses to be attached to NPs playing almost any grammatical role, and since, within a relative clause, the relativized NP can itself play almost any role, sentences containing relative clauses have provided a useful arena for testing various proposed cognitive strategies insofar as they relate to complex structures. In particular, much research has been addressed to SVO sentences in which a relative clause is formed on either the subject or object NP, and in which the relative pronoun is either subject or object.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , Spring 1982 , pp. 23 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bever, T. G. (1970) “The cognitive basis for linguistic structures,” in Hayes, J. R., ed., Cognition and the Development of Language. New York: John Wiley, 279–362.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., and Clark, E. V. (1977) Psychology and Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., and Haviland, S. E. (1974) “Psychological processes as linguistic explanation,” in Cohen, D., ed., Explaining Linguistic Phenomena. Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere, 91–124.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1979) On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kawashima, M. (1980) The Acquisition of Japanese Relative Clauses. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Alberta.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1974) “The position of relative clauses and conjunctions.” Linguistic Inquiry 5:117–36.Google Scholar
Lynkowsky, P. E. (1980) Development of Relative Clauses: Comprehension Strategies in English and Ukrainian. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Alberta.Google Scholar
Prideaux, G.D. (1979) “The acquisition of relative clauses: A functional analysis.” CJL/RCL 24:25–40.Google Scholar
Prideaux, G. D. (1980) “The role of perceptual strategies in the processing of English relative clause structures.” Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Tokyo. 60–66.Google Scholar
Sheldon, A. (1976) “Speakers’ intuitions about the relative complexity of relative clauses in Japanese and English,” in Mufwene, S. S., Walker, C. A., and Steever, S. B., eds., Papers from the Twelfth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society, 1976, 558–67.Google Scholar
Sheldon, A. (1977) “On strategies for processing relative clauses: A comparison of children and adults.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 6:305–15.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973) “Cognitive prerequisites for the development of language,” in Ferguson, C. A. and Slobin, D. I., eds., Studies of Child Language Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 175–208.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1979) Psycholinguistics (Second Edition). Glenview: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
Takahara, P. O. (1978) “Pragmatic functions of the given/new contract in child discourse.” Language Sciences 1:244–72.Google Scholar