Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-xnzfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-01T13:18:35.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Processing Complexity and Filler-Gap Dependencies Across Grammars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

John A. Hawkins
John A. Hawkins*
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
*
Dept. of Linguistics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1693 [hawkins@mizar.usc.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines crosslinguistic variation in FILLER-GAP DEPENDENCIES (WH-questions and relative clauses) from a processing perspective, and integrates research findings from psycholinguistics, language typology and generative grammar. Numerous implicational universals and hierarchies are proposed that receive a natural explanation in terms of processing and complexity. Filler-gap domains are complex in proportion to their size and in proportion to the amount of simultaneous syntactic and semantic processing that is required in addition to gap identification. They are simplified by making the gap easier to identify and process, or by avoiding a gap structure altogether. When grammatical variation is viewed from this perspective many descriptive insights and implicational patterns can be motivated that have either been stipulated or that have gone unnoticed hitherto. This approach provides an alternative to the assumption of innate parameterized subjacency constraints in this area.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 75 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 244 - 285
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allwood, Jens. 1982. The complex NP constraint in Swedish. In Engdahl & Ejerhed, 15–32.Google Scholar
Andersson, Lars-Gunnar. 1982. What is Swedish an exception to? Extractions and island constraints. In Engdahl & Ejerhed, 33–45.Google Scholar
Antonucci, Francesco, Duranti, Alessandro; and Gebert, L. 1979. Relative clause structure, relative clause perception, and the change from SOV to SVO. Cognition 7. 145–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon. 1977. Comments on the paper by Chomsky. Formal syntax, ed. by Culicover, Peter W., Wasow, Thomas, and Akmajian, Adrian, 133–55. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Basilico, David. 1996. Head position and internally headed relative clauses. Language 72. 498–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berwick, Robert. 1985. The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bever, Thomas G. 1970. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. Cognition and the development of language, ed. by Hayes, J.R., 279–362. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 1990. Relational grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bowerman, Melissa. 1988. The 'no negative evidence' problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar? Explaining language universals, ed. by Hawkins, John A., 73–101. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. Festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. by Anderson, Stephen R. and Kiparsky, Paul, 232–86. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Lasnik, Howard. 1977. Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 425–504.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1982. Unbounded dependencies in Chamorro grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 13. 39–77.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1994. Wh-agreement and 'referentiality' in Chamorro. Linguistic Inquiry 25. 1–44.Google Scholar
Clancy, Patricia M., Lee, H.; and Zoh, M. 1986. Processing strategies in the acquisition of relative clauses: Universal principles and language-specific realizations. Cognition 14. 225–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N., McCloskey, James, Maling, Joan; and Zaenen, Annie. 1983. Stringvacuous rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 14. 1–17.Google Scholar
Clifton, Charles, and Frazier, Lyn. 1989. Comprehending sentences with long distance dependencies. Linguistic structure in language processing, ed. by Carlson, Gregory N. and Tannenhaus, Michael K., 272–317. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1973. Clause structure and movement constraints in Russian. You take the high node and I'll take the low node, ed. by Corum, Claudia, Cedric Smith-Stark, T., and Weiser, Ann, 291–304. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology. 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, and Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W. 1993. Evidence against ECP accounts of the that-t effect. Linguistic Inquiry 26. 249–75.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W., and Wilkins, Wendy K. 1984. Locality in linguistic theory. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1990. Verb movement and the subject position in Yiddish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8. 41–79.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68. 81–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet. 1982. Restrictions on unbounded dependencies in Swedish. In Engdahl & Ejerhed, 151–74.Google Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet, and Ejerhed, Eva (eds.) 1982. Readings on unbounded dependencies in Scandinavian languages. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1992. Resumptive pronouns in islands. In Goodluck & Rochemont, 89–108.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi, and Lappin, S. 1979. Dominance and the functional explanation of island phenomena. Theoretical Linguistics 6. 41–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Janet D. 1978. Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 9. 427–73.Google Scholar
Fodor, Janet D. 1983. Phrase structure parsing and the island constraints. Linguistics and Philosophy 6. 163–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Janet D. 1989. Empty categories in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 3. 155–209.Google Scholar
Ford, Marilyn. 1983. A method of obtaining measures of local parsing complexity throughout sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22. 203–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frauenfelder, Ulli, Segui, Juan; and Mehler, Jacques. 1980. Monitoring around the relative clause. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19. 328–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1979. On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1985. Syntactic complexity. Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives, ed. by Dowty, David, Karttunen, Lauri, and Zwicky, Arnold, 129–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1987. Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5. 519–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn, and Flores d'Arcais, Giovanni B. 1989. Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language 28. 331–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald, Klein, Ewan, Pullum, Geoffrey; and Sag, Ivan. 1985. Generalized phrase structure grammar. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gell-Mann, Murray. 1992. Complexity and complex adaptive systems. The evolution of human languages, ed. by Hawkins, John A. and Gell-Mann, Murray, 3–18. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Goodluck, Helen, and Rochement, Michael. 1992. Island constraints: An introduction. In Goodluck & Rochement, 1–33.Google Scholar
Goodluck, Helen (eds.) 1992. Island constraints: Theory, acquisition and processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of language, 2nd edn., ed. by Greenberg, Joseph H., 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther. 1991. Aspekte der deutschen Syntax. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59. 781–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1987. Implicational universals as predictors of language acquisition. Linguistics 25. 453–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1990. A parsing theory of word order universals. Linguistic Inquiry 21. 223–61.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1991. On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27. 405–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1997. Some issues in a performance theory of word order. Constituent order in the languages of Europe, ed. by Siewierska, Anna, 729–80. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1998. Adjacency, linear precedence, and processing efficiency in performance and grammars. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, MS.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1999. The relative ordering of prepositional phrases in English: Going beyond mannerplace-time. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, MS.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, Teun, and Kooij, Jan G. 1988. The innateness hypothesis. Explaining language universals, ed. by Hawkins, John A., 31–55. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holmes, Virginia ML, and O'Regan, J. K. 1981. Eye fixation patterns during the reading of relative clause sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20. 417–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hukari, Thomas E., and Levine, Robert D. 1995. Adjunct extraction. Journal of Linguistics 31. 195–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard, and Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1978. Stylistic inversion, successive cyclicity, and move NP. Linguistic Inquiry 9. 595–621.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1972a. The logical status of deep structures. Proceedings of the eleventh international congress of linguists, ed. by Heilmann, Luigi 477–95. Bologna: Società editrice il Mulino.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1972b. Relative clause formation in Malagasy (and some related and some not so related languages). Chicago Linguistic Society 8 (2). 169–90.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1975. Variation in universal grammar. Analyzing variation in English, ed. by Fasold, Ralph and Shuy, Roger, 136–48. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1985. Relative clauses. Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 2, ed. by Shopen, Timothy, 141–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L., and Comrie, Bernard. 1972. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 63–99.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1979. Data on the noun phrase accessibility hierarchy. Language 55. 333–51.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L., and Hawkins, Sarah. 1987. The psychological validity of the accessibility hierarchy. Universal Grammar: Fifteen essays, ed. by Keenan, Edward L., 60–85. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kim, Alan H. 1988. Preverbal focusing and type XXIII languages. Studies in syntactic typology, ed. by Hammond, Michael, Moravcsik, Edith, and Wirth, Jessica, 147–69. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimball, John. 1973. Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language. Cognition 2. 15–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Jonathan, and Just, Marcel A. 1991. Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language 30. 580–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Jonathan, and Kutas, Marta. 1992. ERP responses to sentences that vary in syntactic complexity: Differences between good and poor comprehenders. Poster presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
King, Jonathan. 1993. Bridging gaps with longer spans: Enhancing ERP studies of parsing. Poster presented at the Sixth Annual CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul, and Kiparsky, Carol. 1970. Fact. Progress in linguistics, ed. by Bierwisch, Manfred and Heidolph, Karl E., 143–73. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kirby, Simon. 1994. Adaptive explanations for language universals: A model of Hawkins' performance theory. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 47. 186–210.Google Scholar
Kirby, Simon. 1999. Function, selection and innateness: The emergence of language universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluender, Robert. 1992. Deriving island constraints from principles of predication. Island constraints: Theory, acquisition and processing, ed. by Goodluck, Helen and Rochemont, Michael, 223–58. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluender, Robert. 1997. On the distinction between strong and weak islands: A processing perspective. Syntax and semantics: The limits of syntax, ed. by Culicover, Peter and McNally, Louise, 241–79. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kluender, Robert and Kutas, Marta. 1993a. Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes 8. 573–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluender, Robert. 1993b. Bridging the gap: Evidence from ERPs on the processing of unbounded dependencies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 5. 196–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. 1984. The syntax of verbs. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kvam, Sigmund. 1983. Linksverschachtelung im Deutschen und Norwegischen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1984. Der Relativsatz. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Li, Audrey Yen-Hui. 1990. Order and constituency in Mandarin Chinese. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian, and Pleh, C. 1988. The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian. Cognition 29. 95–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maxwell, Daniel N. 1979. Strategies of relativization and NP accessibility. Language 55. 352–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, James. 1979. Transformational syntax and model-theoretic semantics: A case study in Modern Irish. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, George, and Chomsky, Noam. 1963. Finitary models of language users. Handbook of mathematical psychology, vol. 2, ed. by Luce, R.D., Bush, R., and Galanter, E., 419–92. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Moortgat, Michael. 1988. Categorial investigations: Logical and linguistic aspects of the lambek calculus. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagaraja, K. S. 1985. Khasi: A descriptive analysis. Pune: Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute.Google Scholar
Neville, H. J., Nichol, J. L., Barss, A., Forster, K. I.; and Garrett, M. F. 1991. Syntactically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 3. 151–65.Google ScholarPubMed
Petronio, Karen, and Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1997. Wh-movement and the position of spec-CP: Evidence from American Sign Language. Language 73. 18–57.Google ScholarPubMed
Pickering, Martin, and Shillcock, Richard. 1992. Processing subject extractions. In Goodluck & Rochemont, 295–320.Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin, Barton, Stephen; and Shillcock, Richard. 1994. Unbounded dependencies, island constraints, and processing complexity. Perspectives on sentence processing, ed. by Clifton, Charles, Frazier, Lyn, and Rayner, Keith, 199–224. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pollard, Carl, and Sag, Ivan. 1993. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice. 1993. Syntactic relations. Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research, vol. 1, ed. by Jacobs, Joachim, Stechow, Arnim von, Sternefeld, Wolfgang, and Vennemann, Theo, 686–705. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Primus, Beatrice. 1997. The relative order of recipient and patient in the languages of Europe. Constituent order in the languages of Europe, ed. by Siewierska, Anna, 421–73. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice. 1999. Cases and thematic roles: Ergative, accusative, active. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Violations of the wh-island constraint and the subjacency condition. Issues in Italian syntax, ed. by Rizzi, Luigi, 49–76. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, John R. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Saah, Kofi K., and Goodluck, Helen. 1995. Island effects in parsing and grammar: Evidence from Akan. Linguistic Review 12. 381–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, Amy. 1974. On the role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13. 272–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stassen, Leon. 1985. Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Steedman, Mark. 1987. Combinatory grammars and parasitic gaps. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5. 403–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stowe, Laurie A. 1986. Parsing wh-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes 1. 227–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrego, Esther. 1984. On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects. Linguistic Inquiry 15. 103–30.Google Scholar
Traxler, M. J., and Pickering, Martin J. 1996. Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 35. 454–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ultan, Russell. 1978. Some general characteristics of interrogative systems. Universals of human language, ed. by Greenberg, Joseph H., 211–48. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Wanner, Eric, and Maratsos, Michael. 1978. An ATN approach to comprehension. Linguistic theory and psychological reality, ed. by Halle, Morris, Bresnan, Joan, and Miller, George A., 119–61. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar