1 Processing Japanese Relative Clauses in Different Syntactic Environments Barış KAHRAMAN*, Hajime ONO**, and Hiromu SAKAI* *Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima University, 1-1-1Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima, 739-8524 Japan heiwaeiyu@gmail.com , hsakai@hiroshima-u.ac.jp **Faculty of Foreign Languages, Kansai Gaidai University, 16-1 Nakamiya Higashino-cho, Hirakata, Osaka, 573-1001 Japan onohajim@kansaigaidai-u.ac.jp This study examines the processing difficulty of Japanese relative clauses in two different syntactic environments. We attempt to answer these two questions: 1) Whether or not the object relative clauses (ORCs) are less predictable than the subject relative clauses (SRCs) without any discourse-context. 2) Whether the predictability of relative clauses is directly reflected in their processing difficulty. To answer these questions we conducted a sentence-fragment completion experiment and a self-paced reading experiment. The results revealed that the ORCs are not less predictable than the SRCs, and their observed predictability was reflected in the processing difficulty. Moreover, the processing difficulty of the ORCs and SRCs varied depending on the syntactic environment in which they appeared. These results suggest that the distance based accounts alone cannot capture the whole range of facts observed in relative clause processing, and predictability of the relative clauses might be another important factor for the processing difficulty. 1. Introduction  In the psycholinguistics literature, it has been reported that in many languages, the subject relative clauses (SRCs) are easier to process (read) than the object relative clauses (ORCs) (e.g., Dutch: Mak et al., 2006; English: Traxler et al., 2002; French: Holmes & O’ Regan, 1981; German: Schfriers et al., 1995; Japanese: Ueno & Garnsey, 2008; Korean: Kwon et al., 2006). In order to explain this phenomena, many hypothesizes have been put forward. The notion of “filler and gap dependencies” plays a crucial role in the relative clause processing. The “filler” is used for the moved WH-element and, the “gap” for the original sentence position of the moved WH-element. In the example (1), who is a filler, and “___” shows its gap position. (1a) ORC: The student [ S who i the professor [ VP saw ___ i ]... (1b) SRC: The student [ S who i ___ i [ VP saw the professor]... It is assumed that in order to understand relative clauses, it is necessary to set up an association between the filler and the gap (e.g., Fodor, 1989; Hawkins, 1999). The determining factor for the processing difficulty between the ORCs and the SRCs is assumed to be distance between the filler and the gap (c.f., Gibson, 1998; O’Grady, 1997). According to Gibson (1998), the number of discourse referents (words) between the filler and the gap is the source for the processing difficulty. This is conventionally called “linear distance hypothesis” (LDH). The LDH predicts that the SRCs are easier to process than the ORCs because there are intervening words between the filler and the gap in the ORCs. On the other hand the filler and the gap are adjacent to each other in the SRCs. Alternatively; O’Grady (1997) assumes that the number of syntactic nodes between the filler and the gap is responsible for the processing difficulty between the ORCs and the SRCs. This is conventionally called “structural distance hypothesis” (SDH). According to the SDH, since there are fewer nodes between the filler and the gap in the SRCs, they are easier to process than the ORCs. This paper examines whether or not the distance (linear or structural) between the filler and the gap is the main factor for the processing difficulty of relative clauses in the head-final languages through Japanese. In English or English-like languages both the LDH and the SDH predict that the SRCs are easier to process than the ORCs. This means that it is impossible to distinguish the validity between the LDH and the SDH through English or English-like languages. On the other hand, it is possible to distinguish the validity between the LDH and the SDH through head-final languages like Japanese (e.g., Ishizuka, 2005; Ueno & Garnsey, 2008), since these hypothesizes make different predictions for the processing difficulty of the ORCs and the SRCs in Japanese.  Kahraman, B. Ono, H. & Sakai, H. (2009). Processing Japanese Relative Clauses in Different Syntactic Environments. In Derya Ç. Karadaş & Ferit Kılıçkaya (Eds.), The 6th METU International Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and Language Teaching Proceedings. 60-71. Ankara, TURKEY: Murat Kitabevi.