Skip to main content Accessibility help

Testing the effect of an arbitrary subject pronoun on relative clause comprehension: a study with Hebrew-speaking children

  • Yair HAENDLER (a1) and Flavia ADANI (a2)


Previous studies have found that Hebrew-speaking children accurately comprehend object relatives (OR) with an embedded non-referential arbitrary subject pronoun (ASP). The facilitation of ORs with embedded pronouns is expected both from a discourse-pragmatics perspective and within a syntax-based locality approach. However, the specific effect of ASP might also be driven by a mismatch in grammatical features between the head noun and the pronoun, or by its relatively undemanding referential properties. We tested these possibilities by comparing ORs whose embedded subject is either ASP, a referential pronoun, or a lexical noun phrase. In all conditions, grammatical features were controlled. In a referent-identification task, the matching features made ORs with embedded pronouns difficult for five-year-olds. Accuracy was particularly low when the embedded pronoun was referential. These results indicate that embedded pronouns do not facilitate ORs across the board, and that the referential properties of pronouns affect OR processing.


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. E-mail:


Hide All
Adani, F., Forgiarini, M., Guasti, M. T., & van der Lely, H. K. J. (2014). Number dissimilarities facilitate the comprehension of relative clauses in children with (Grammatical) Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Child Language, 41, 811–41.
Adani, F., & Fritzsche, T. (2015). On the relation between implicit and explicit measures of child language development: evidence from relative clause processing in 4-year-olds and adults. In Grillo, E. & Jepson, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 1426). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Adani, F., van der Lely, H. K. J., Forgiarini, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2010). Grammatical feature dissimilarities make relative clauses easier: a comprehension study with Italian children. Lingua, 120, 2148–66.
Allen, S. E. M., Hughes, M. E., & Skarabela, B. (2015). The role of cognitive accessibility in children's referential choice. In Serratrice, L. & Allen, S. E. M. (Eds.), The acquisition of reference (pp. 123–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ariel, M. (1999). Cognitive universals and linguistic conventions: the case of resumptive pronouns. Studies in Language, 23, 217–69.
Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility theory: an overview. In Sanders, T., Schilperhood, J., & Spooren, W. (Eds.), Text representation, (pp. 2987). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Arnold, J. E. (2010). How speakers refer: the role of accessibility. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(4), 187203.
Arnold, J. E., & Griffin, Z. (2007). The effect of additional character on choice of referring expression: everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 521–36.
Arnon, I. (2010). Rethinking child difficulty: the effect of NP type on children's processing of relative clauses in Hebrew. Journal of Child Language, 37, 2757.
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390412.
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 148.
Belletti, A., Friedmann, N., Brunato, D., & Rizzi, L. (2012). Does gender make a difference? Comparing the effect of gender on children's comprehension of relative clauses in Hebrew and Italian. Lingua, 122, 1053–69.
Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21, 4767.
Boeckx, C. (2003). Islands and chains: resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Brandt, S., Kidd, E., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2009). The discourse bases of relativization: an investigation of young German- and English-speaking children's comprehension of relative clauses. Cognitive Linguistics, 20, 539–70.
Brandt, S., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2016). German children's use of word order and case marking to interpret simple and complex sentences: testing differences between constructions and lexical items. Language, Learning, and Development, 12, 156–82.
Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). The role of executive function in perspective-taking during on-line language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 893900.
Carminati, M. N. (2005). Processing reflexes of the Feature Hierarchy (Person > Number > Gender) and implications for linguistic theory. Lingua, 115, 259–85.
Contemori, C., & Marinis, T. (2014). The impact of number mismatch and passives on the real-time processing of relative clauses. Journal of Child Language, 41, 658–89.
Coyer, C. (2009). Acquisition of relatives in French and the que/qui issue. Unpublished dissertation, University of Siena.
De Cat, C. (2015). The cognitive underpinnings of referential abilities. In Serratrice, L. & Allen, S. E. M. (Eds.), The acquisition of reference (pp. 213–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Diessel, H., & Tomasello, M. (2000). The development of relative clauses in spontaneous child speech. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(1/2), 131–51.
Doron, E. (1982). On the syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Texas Linguistic Forum, 19, 148.
Epley, N., Morewedge, C., & Keysar, B. (2004). Perspective taking in children and adults: equivalent egocentrism but differential correction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 760–8.
Foraker, S., & McElree, B. (2007). The role of prominence in pronoun resolution: active versus passive representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 357–83.
Friedmann, N., Aram, D., & Novogrodsky, R. (2011). Definitions as a window to the acquisition of relative clauses. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 687710.
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119, 6788.
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2004). The acquisition of relative clause comprehension in Hebrew: a study of SLI and normal development. Journal of Child Language, 31, 661–81.
Fukumura, K., & van Gompel, R. P. G. (2012). Producing pronouns and definite noun phrases: Do speakers use the addressee's discourse model? Cognitive Science, 36(7), 1289–311.
Fukumura, K., & van Gompel, R. P. G. (2015). Effects of order of mention and grammatical role on anaphor resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 501–25.
Fukumura, K., van Gompel, R. P. G., Harley, T., & Pickering, M. J. (2011). How does similarity-based interference affect the choice of referring expression? Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 331–44.
Fukumura, K., van Gompel, R. P. G., & Pickering, M. J. (2010). The use of visual context during the production of referring expressions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(9), 1700–15.
Grillo, N. (2009). Generalized minimality: feature impoverishment and comprehension deficits in agrammatism. Lingua, 119, 1426–43.
Grodner, D., Dalini, M., Pearlstein-Levy, S., & Ward, A. (2012). Factors that contribute to the use of perspective in referent identification. Paper presented at Annual City University of New York Conference on Human Sentence Processing.
Guenzberg-Kerbel, N., Shvimer, L., & Friedmann, N. (2008). “Kekhi et ha-tarnegolet she-ha-para nishka et ha-tarnegolet”: Havana ve-hafaka shel mishpetei zika mi-sugim shonim be-kerev yaldei gan dovrei ivrit [“Take the hen that the cow kissed the hen”: comprehension and production of various relative clause types in preschool Hebrew-speaking children]. Language and Brain, 7, 2343.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69(2), 274307.
Haendler, Y. (2017). Cross-linguistic evidence for effects of impersonal vs. referential pronouns in sentence processing. Poster presented at the 30th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, MIT (Cambridge, MA).
Haendler, Y., Kliegl, R., & Adani, F. (2015). Discourse accessibility constraints in children's processing of object relative clauses. Frontiers in Psychology, 6:860. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00860.
Hartshorne, J. K., Nappa, R., & Snedeker, J. (2015). Development of the first-mention bias. Journal of Child Language, 42, 423–46.
Hu, S., Gavarró, A., Vernice, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2016). The acquisition of Chinese relative clauses: contrasting two theoretical approaches. Journal of Child Language, 43, 121.
Hughes, M. E., & Allen, S. E. M. (2013). The effect of individual discourse-pragmatic features on referential choice in child English. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 1530.
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–46.
Keysar, B., Barr, D., Balin, J., & Bruauner, J. (2000). Taking perspective in conversation: the role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science, 11, 32–8.
Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89, 2541.
Kidd, E., Brandt, S., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2007). Object relatives made easy: a cross-linguistic comparison of the constraints influencing young children's processing of relative clauses. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(6), 860–97.
Köder, F., & Maier, E. (2016). Children mix direct and indirect speech: evidence from pronoun comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 43, 843–66.
Lassotta, R., Adelt, A., Stadie, N., Burchert, F., & Adani, F. (2015). Testing relativized minimality with German relative clauses. Talk presented at the 12th Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition Conference, University of Nantes (France).
Legendre, G., & Smolensky, P. (2012). On the asymmetrical difficulty of acquiring person reference in French: production versus comprehension. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 21, 730.
Mak, W. M., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2008). Discourse structure and relative clause processing. Memory & Cognition, 36(1), 170–81.
Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305–15.
Meltzer-Asscher, A., Fadlon, J., Goldstein, K., & Holan, A. (2015). Direct object resumption in Hebrew: how modality of presentation and relative clause position affect acceptability. Lingua, 166, 6579.
Novogrodsky, R., & Friedmann, N. (2006). The production of relative clauses in syntactic SLI: a window to the nature of the impairment. Advances in Language-Speech Pathology, 8, 364–75.
Reali, F., & Christiansen, M. H. (2007). Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 123.
Rizzi, L. (2013). Locality. Lingua, 130, 169–86.
Roland, D., Mauner, G., O'Meara, C., & Yun, H. (2012). Discourse expectations and relative clause processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 479508.
Salazar Orvig, A., & Morgenstern, A. (2015). Acquisition and use of pronouns in a dialogic perspective. In Serratrice, L., & Allen, S. E. M. (Eds.), The acquisition of reference (pp. 155–80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sekerina, I. A. (2015). Online evidence for children's interpretation of personal pronouns. In Serratrice, L., & Allen, S. E. M. (Eds.), The acquisition of reference (pp. 213–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Serratrice, L. (2013). The role of number of referents and animacy in children's use of pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 3142.
Shlonsky, U. (1992). Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 443–68.
Shlonsky, U. (2014). Referential third person null subjects in Hebrew. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 6, 2744.
Song, H. J., & Fisher, C. (2005). Who's ‘she’? Discourse prominence influences preschoolers’ comprehension of pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 2957.
Vogels, J., Krahmer, E., & Maes, A. (2013). Who is where referred to how, and why? The influence of visual saliency on referent accessibility in spoken language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 1323–49.
Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2002). The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85, 79112.


Testing the effect of an arbitrary subject pronoun on relative clause comprehension: a study with Hebrew-speaking children

  • Yair HAENDLER (a1) and Flavia ADANI (a2)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed