Phase Penetration and L2 Korean Relative Clauses: A Proposal against the Structural Distance Hypothesis

Abstract

This article brings up theoretical shortcomings of the Structural Distance Hypothesis (SDH), claimed in O`Grady et al. (2003). The SDH alleges that there exists a syntactic dependency between the head noun (filler) of relative clause (RC) and the Case position (gap) of the operator (OP) in L2 RC. This dependency accounts for the processing difficulty captured within the RCs of the NPAH (Noun Phrase Accessibility Hierarchy, Keenan & Comrie, 1977). This article, however, submits the arguments against the SDH: (i) The role of filler seems to be pointless because the position of gap is sufficient to calculate processing difficulty. (ii) The gaps in SUB RCs and DO RCs have different syntactic properties for fair comparison. (iii) The role of OP is crucial during relativization, but it is completely overlooked in the SDH. And, (iv) the SDH cannot predict processing difficulties for homogeneous RCs. In contrast, the phase analysis under the minimalist framework (Chomsky, 1998, 1999, 2001) provides an alternative account for determining the processing difficulty for SUB RCs and DO RCs as well as for other RCs on the lower end of the NPAH. The alternative account hinges on the occurrences of phase penetration by the target features, as being probed and agreed by C and T and merged into Spec-C and Spec-T. By restricting the processing difficulty within the conditions of phase penetration, L2 acquisition studies can be shed light on with a more principled insight into anticipating the UG-constrained developmental order in RCs.