Studies on Indo-European languages argue that subject relative clauses （SRCs） are easier to process than object relative clauses （ORCs）, and the processing preference for SRCs was manipulated by the animacy of the...Studies on Indo-European languages argue that subject relative clauses （SRCs） are easier to process than object relative clauses （ORCs）, and the processing preference for SRCs was manipulated by the animacy of the noun phrases （NPs） in the internal-clause and in the main clause. This paper aims at investigating the difficulty in Chinese RCs processing by subjective ratings and the results showed： （1） As European languages, Chinese RCs processing also shows a preference for SRCs, which was consistent with experience-based account, as well as NPAH in part. （2） A strong animacy effect from the head noun phrases （NPs） was found during Chinese RCs processing. In all, compared with other accounts, experience-based account offers more reasonable explanations about Chinese RCs comprehension in natural situations.展开更多
基金This research was financially supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China （Grant NO. 13CYY026）.
文摘Studies on Indo-European languages argue that subject relative clauses （SRCs） are easier to process than object relative clauses （ORCs）, and the processing preference for SRCs was manipulated by the animacy of the noun phrases （NPs） in the internal-clause and in the main clause. This paper aims at investigating the difficulty in Chinese RCs processing by subjective ratings and the results showed： （1） As European languages, Chinese RCs processing also shows a preference for SRCs, which was consistent with experience-based account, as well as NPAH in part. （2） A strong animacy effect from the head noun phrases （NPs） was found during Chinese RCs processing. In all, compared with other accounts, experience-based account offers more reasonable explanations about Chinese RCs comprehension in natural situations.
