J East Asian Linguist (2007) 16:145–170
DOI 10.1007/s10831-007-9010-8

Identifying empty subjects by modality information:
the case of the Japanese sentence-final particles-yo and -ne
Katsuo Tamaoka Æ Michiaki Matsumoto ÆTsutomu Sakamoto

Received: 2 November 2004 / Accepted: 8 December 2006 / Published online: 13 April 2007
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Abstract The present study conducted four experiments to investigate how
modality information provided through the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne were
utilized in identifying an empty subject by native Japanese speakers. Experiment 1
conducted a whole-sentence anomaly decision task, finding that base sentences
without -yo and -ne attached were processed more quickly than sentences with either-yo or -ne and that sentences with -yo were processed more quickly than the samesentences with -ne. A delay in processing sentences with -ne was created by the
ambiguity of an empty subject identified by -ne as either ‘I’ or ‘you’. In Experiment2, the auxiliary verb -ou ‘let us’ was added to the base sentence before -yo and-ne, providing a cue to identify the empty subject as ‘we’. Although the base sentences were processed more quickly than those containing the particles -yo and -ne,no other difference resulted from the attachment of these particles. To eliminate thepossibility of orthographic-length effects, Experiment 3 compared base sentenceswith -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne, finding no difference among them (i.e., no orthographic-length effects). Experiment 4 was conducted to further eliminate the

The present study is supported by the Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society(RISTEX) at the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Kawaguchi, Japan.
The principle recipient of this grant is Dr. Hiroko Hagiwara at the Tokyo Metropolitan
University, Japan.
K. Tamaoka (&)
International Student Center, Hiroshima University,
1-1, 1-chome, Kagamiyama,
Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8523, Japane-mail: ktamaoka@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
M. Matsumoto
Department of Humanities, Kyushu Lutheran College,
Kumamoto, Japan
T. Sakamoto
Faculty of Humanities, Kyushu University,
Fukuoka, Japan

123

146

K. Tamaoka et al.

possible involvement of discourse-level computation by utilizing base sentences withovert subjects, past tense verbs, and the auxiliary verb -rasii ‘appear to’. Oncesubjects of sentences were clearly shown, there was no difference among base sentences and those with either -yo or -ne attached (i.e., no discourse-level computation
effects). Thus the present study proved that the modality information inherent in theparticles -yo and -ne was used for identifying empty subjects.
Keywords Empty subject Æ Japanese sentence-final particles Æ Modality
information Æ Prodrop language Æ Discourse-level computation

1 Introduction—purpose of the study
A sentence occasionally seems not to provide all the information necessary to complete its meaning. For example, a grammatical subject is often omitted in Japanese
sentences. Nevertheless, native Japanese speakers can often effortlessly identify
those unexpressed elements. Sakamoto (1995, 1996, 2002) and Sakamoto andWalenski (1998) investigated the processing of Japanese empty subjects in subordinate clauses, suggesting that native Japanese speakers seem to utilize two different
levels of information for two different tasks. Case information at the syntactic level iseffectively used in recognition tasks whereas theta-role is implicated at the semantic
level in retrieval tasks. Sakamoto (2002) refers to these two streams of processing as
the Multi-level Parsing Model, which was initially conceptualized by Frazier andFodor (1978) as the Two Stage Parsing Model. In this model, case information relevant at the syntactic level is utilized for automatic and shallow processing whereas
the theta-role information relevant at the semantic level is used for conscious anddeep processing. Recent cognitive neurological studies (e.g., Friederici et al. 2003a, b;
Hahne and Friederici 1999, 2002; Nakagome et al. 2001) provide evidence to support
this interplay between syntax and semantics although the findings of these studies are
not always consistent (Hagoort 2003). The present study proposes another kind of
information utilized for the processing of an empty subject, that is, modality information (for detailed discussions on modality, see Akatsuka and Tsubomoto 1998;
Moriyama et al. 2000; Nitta and Masuoka 1998).
Japanese sentence-final particles are intensively used in colloquial Japanese toexpress the various moods of a speaker so that they are considered to containmodality information. The referent to an empty subject shifts dramatically by simply
altering the particles -yo and -ne, a typical example of this being Raisyuu-wa øTokyo-e ikitain desu-yo (ø refers to an empty subject) ‘I want to go to Tokyo next
week’. In this sentence, the information expressed in the context (i.e., the desire to go
to Tokyo) is exclusively possessed by the speaker, and thus the empty subject isinterpreted as ‘I’ (i.e., the speaker). In contrast, once -yo is changed to -ne, as inRaisyuu-wa ø Tokyo-e ikitain desu-ne with a rising intonation (for a detailed discussion of intonation, see Katagiri 1997; Eda 2000) upon -ne at the end, the subject is
identified as ‘you’, and the meaning of the sentence becomes ‘You want to go to
Tokyo next week, don’t you?’ In this sentence, information is possessed mainly by thehearer, and thus the empty subject is found to be ‘you’. To summarize, the sentencefinal particles -yo and -ne imply the possible referents to empty subject as either ‘I’ or‘you’ by shifting the possessor of information between speaker and hearer, thereby

123

Identifying empty subjects

147

identifying the empty subject. The present study investigated how the sentence-final
particles -yo and -ne affect the identification of empty subjects in sentence processing.

2 An overview of the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne
Recently, a great deal of Japanese linguistic research into the nature of sentencefinal particles has resulted in some intriguing theories (e.g., Eda 2000; Inoue 1997;
Kamio 1990, 1994, 2002; Katagiri 1995, 1997; Kinsui 1993; Masuoka 1991; Matsuoka
2003; Maynard 1993; Nakagawa and Ono 1996; Ohso 1986; Takahashi et al. 2004;
Takubo and Kinsui 1996; Xu 2002). Before discussing the experiments of the present
study, let us briefly survey the main usages of the two major sentence-final particles-yo and -ne.
2.1 The usages of -yo
In the framework of discourse management theory, Kinsui (1993) identified informative and warning usages of the particle -yo. For informative usage, a typicalexample is a sentence such as Ah, hankati-ga otimasita-yo ‘Oh, your handkerchiefhas dropped!’ In this sentence, the speaker informs the hearer of the unnoticed factthat the latter has dropped his/her handkerchief. Without the final particle -yo, thesentence carries only the meaning of a blunt statement, ‘a handkerchief has dropped’. Without -yo, this sentence does not even indicate whose handkerchief was
dropped. Thus, in this context, -yo functions as a relational bridge between the
speaker and the hearer whereby the speaker tells the hearer that his/her handkerchief has dropped.
An example of the warning usage of -yo is a sentence such as Omae-wa jukensei
da-yo. Terebi-o kesite, benkyoo sinasai ‘You are a candidate for entrance examinations! Turn off the TV and study!’ In this sentence, the speaker warns the hearer
that watching TV is not appropriate for a candidate for entrance examinations.
Again, without -yo, this sentence conveys only the simple statement that the hearer
is a candidate for entrance examinations. Like the informative usage, -yo provides a
relation between the speaker and the hearer, but instead of merely providing
information, the speaker warns the hearer.
In addition to these two usages, Nakagawa and Ono (1996) describe a usage for-yo which does not assume the existence of the hearer, and thus there is no relation
between the speaker and the hearer with this usage of -yo. For example, a sentencesuch as A~a mata hooroo da-yo ‘Alas! It’s back to a vagrant’s life’ does not require
any hearer. The speaker is saying to himself/herself that he/she is regressing to a
vagrant life again. Nakagawa and Ono (1996) point out that since no hearer isassumed in this context, this usage can be classified as soliloquy usage. Thus, -yo has
three basic usages: informative, warning, and soliloquy.
2.2 Usages of -ne
According to Kinsui (1993), usages of the sentence-final particle -ne can also beclassified into three types, namely, usages of confirmation, requesting agreement/
confirmation, and self-confirmation. A typical example of confirmation might occur
during an interview. The interviewer asks ø Suzuki Taro-kun desu-ne ‘You are Taro

123

148

K. Tamaoka et al.

Suzuki, aren’t you?’ and the interviewee responds Hai, sou desu ‘Yes, I am’. Theinterviewer (i.e., the speaker) uses -ne to confirm the uncertain information of
the name of the applicant. The interviewee’s name, Taro Suzuki, which is known by
the interviewee (i.e., the hearer), is new information for the speaker (the interviewer). The particle -ne in this sentence provides a cue toward identifying an empty
subject for the information possessor ‘you’. By adding -ne at the end of sentence, thespeaker not only asks a question but also confirms this new information.
The second usage of -ne is to request agreement/confirmation. A common convention for starting conversation in Japanese is to ask a question such as Kyoo-wa ii
tenki desu-ne ‘It’s a fine day, isn’t it?’ The hearer replies Ee, ‘Yes, it is’. In thisconversation, the information regarding the weather is shared by both the speaker
and the hearer. The speaker is merely asking the hearer to give assent to a remark
regarding the weather. For this reason, Kinsui (1993) defines this usage of -ne asrequesting agreement/confirmation.
The third usage is self-confirmation. Someone asks another Ima nanzi desu ka‘What time is it now?’ While looking at his/her watch, the hearer replies Eeto, sanzi
desu-ne ‘Well, it’s three o’clock’. In this context, the person who states the timeknows that the present time is three o’clock and is just checking his/her watch toconfirm it. Unlike the first usage of confirmation, the information the speakerpossesses (i.e., the time of day) is not known by the person who asked for it (i.e., thehearer). Thus, this usage of -ne is distinguished from the first usage of hearer’s
confirmation and is classified as speaker’s self-confirmation.
2.3 Summarizing the usages of -yo and -ne from two different perspectives
When all the usages of -yo and -ne are combined in discourse, they can be viewed
from the two perspectives of existence of the hearer and possessor of information, as
depicted in Table 1. Under the first perspective (existence of the hearer), usage of-yo and -ne can be categorized by the existence or non-existence of the hearer. The
usage of -yo for soliloquy and the usage of -ne for self-confirmation do not assume
the existence of the hearer (indicated as ‘)’). In other words, the speaker merely
speaks to himself/herself in these two usages. Other usages of -ne and -yo imply the
Table 1

Usages of the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne

Type of thesentenceﬁnal particle

Types of usages

Existence ofthe hearer

Possessor of
information-yo

Informative
Warning
SoliloquyConﬁrmation
Requesting
agreement/conﬁrmation
Self-conﬁrmation

+
+
)
+
+

Speaker
Speaker and hearer
Speaker
HearerSpeaker and hearer)

Speaker-neNote 1: ‘+’ refers to existence of the hearer while ‘)’ refers to non-existence
Note 2: Usages in shaded cells are utilized for the experiments

123

Identifying empty subjects

149

existence of the hearer (indicated by ‘+’). These usages imply communication
between the speaker and the hearer.
Under the second perspective (possessor of information), the usages of -yo and-ne can be categorized three ways on the basis of who possesses the information: thespeaker, the hearer, or both. The information expressed in the informative -yo usage,
as in Hankati-ga otimasita-yo ‘Your handkerchief has dropped’ is exclusively
possessed by the speaker. The speaker may have actually seen the handkerchief drop
while walking on the street and then approached the hearer and made the statement.
Thus, the hearer had no prior information about the dropped handkerchief. On thecontrary, with the usage of -ne for confirmation, Suzuki Taro-kun desu-ne ‘You are
Taro Suzuki, aren’t you?’, the information regarding the name of the applicant isheld by the hearer (interviewee) rather than by the speaker (interviewer). For theusage of -yo for soliloquy and the usage of -ne for self-confirmation, the informationis held by the speaker because the speaker is talking to himself/herself without any
intention of conveying a message to a hearer.
In the third classification, the information is shared by both the hearer and the
speaker. The usage of -yo for warning is applied, for example, in the discourse of amother scolding a child who has been watching TV for three hours: Omae-wa jukensei
da-yo ‘You are a candidate for entrance examinations!’ The information regarding
her child being a candidate for examination is shared by the mother (the speaker) andthe child (the hearer). Likewise, in the usage of -ne for requesting agreement/confirmation, a speaker meets someone and initiates a conversation with the sentence
Kyoo-wa ii tennki desu-ne ‘It’s a fine day, isn’t it?’ Again, the information regarding
the fine weather is already known to both the speaker and the hearer.
The contrast of -yo and -ne under the perspective of information possessors
makes the particles -yo and -ne unique in terms of empty subjects. In the
aforementioned sentence, ø Tokyo-e ikitain desu-yo ‘I want to go to Tokyo’, theinformation about the desire to go to Tokyo belongs exclusively to the speaker, andtherefore the empty subject is identified as ‘I’, the speaker. However, once -yo ischanged to -ne as in ø Tokyo-e ikitain desu-ne, ‘You want to go to Tokyo, don’tyou?’, information regarding the desire to go to Tokyo is held by the hearer, notthe speaker. Thus, the empty subject is found to be ‘you’. As such, the shift
between -yo and -ne closely relates to the identification of empty subjects.

3 Outline of four experiments and their limitation
The present study consists of four experiments used to examine the effects of thesentence-final particles -yo and -ne in the identification of empty subjects. Since theseparticles come after a whole sentence is processed, there was no need to measure theprocessing time for each phrase, which can otherwise be accomplished by the selfpace reading method (see, e.g., Inoue 1998; Miyamoto et al. 1999; Tokimoto 2005).
Thus all four experiments employed an anomalous-sentence decision task which
required participants to determine whether or not a sentence was correct after seeing
it in its entirety. This experimental approach has been proven sufficiently sensitive todetect scrambling effects (e.g., Koizumi and Tamaoka 2004; Tamaoka et al. 2005) andwas therefore selected for the purpose of the present study.
Experiment 1 compared three types of sentences: (1) base sentences, (2) sentences with -yo, and (3) sentences with -ne. Base sentences were created using

123

150

K. Tamaoka et al.

activity verbs in non-past indicative form (syuushi-kei) requiring agentive subjects,
as in ø Terebi-o miru ‘ø watch TV’. In this base sentence, any subject, including not
only ‘I’ or ‘you’ but also ‘we’, ‘they’, ‘he’, or ‘she’, could be a candidate for the
subject. However, because base sentences were constructed using the non-past
indicative form, which can be understood as a simple assertion or citation-like form
rather than a full sentence requiring subjects or tense/modality, it was assumed thatprocessing would be terminated before an empty subject was identified. In this sense,such base sentences could be considered ‘defaults’.
To create two experimental conditions, the sentence-final particles of -yo and -ne
were attached to base sentences. For example, a sentence with -yo is formed:
ø Terebi-o miru-yo. In this sentence, the ‘default’ base sentence is further processed
to identify the empty subject and complete its meaning; an empty subject is interpreted as the speaker ‘I’ by the sentence-final particle -yo. This is the -yo informative
usage indicated by the shaded cell in Table 1. Compared to the base sentence, extra
time would be required for the processing of sentences with -yo due to the need to
identify the empty subject. Instead of -yo, when sentence-final particle -ne is added,
as in ø Terebi-o miru-ne, the subject of the sentence becomes ambiguous, as it can beinterpreted in two ways. The sentence could be understood to mean ‘I will watch
TV’ with the implicit question, ‘Will it bother you if I watch TV?’ (i.e., -ne requesting
agreement). It could be also interpreted as a question to the hearer: ‘You watch TV,
don’t you?’, assuming ‘naturally, you do’ (i.e., -ne confirmation usage). These twointerpretations, indicated by the shaded cells of -ne in Table 1, could be distinguished in natural conversation by intonation, the former with a falling tone and thelatter with a rising tone (for a more detailed discussion, see Eda 2000; Katagiri 1997).
In written form, of course, the prosodic information is not available. In written
Japanese, unlike the example of English, since a question mark is not required tocompose an interrogative statement and since the particle -ne is never followed by
the question form -ka, there is no way to identify the empty subject as ‘I’ or ‘you’.
Thus, Experiment 1 assumed that sentences with -yo and -ne would both need aprocessing time longer than the base sentences and that sentences with -ne would
require a processing time even longer than the same sentences with -yo.
Interestingly, when the auxiliary verb -ou, referring to ‘invitation’, is placed
between the verb mi- ‘watch’ and the final particles -yo and -ne as in mi-y-ou-yo
and mi-y-ou-ne, the subject of the sentence becomes clearly as ‘we’, meaning ‘Let’swatch TV!’. Therefore, Experiment 2 investigated how native Japanese speakers
utilize the auxiliary verb -ou to identify an empty subject. To do so, Experiment 2
compared three types of sentences: (1) base sentences, (2) sentences with -ou-yo,
and (3) sentences with -ou-ne. It was assumed that sentences with -ou-yo and-ou-ne would both require a longer time to process than base sentences. However,since both -ou-yo and -ou-ne sentences contained -ou, indicating the empty subject‘we’, it was assumed that there would be no difference in the processing time
between them.
The present study presumed that base sentences were ‘defaults’, which would notinvite the identification of empty subjects. However, the longer processing time in-yo/-ne sentences, which was expected in Experiments 1 and 2, could be caused by
the simple orthographic-length effect of an added word(s), namely -yo and -ne inExperiment 1 and -ou-yo and -ou-ne in Experiment 2, which were attached to thebase sentences. Thus, Experiment 3 compared three types of sentences: (1) sentenceswith -ou, (2) sentences with -ou-yo, and (3) sentences with -ou-ne. The empty

123

Identifying empty subjects

151

subjects of all three types of sentences were identified as ‘we’ by the auxiliary verb
-ou. If orthographic-length affects processing time, sentences with -ou would
obviously be processed more quickly than the other two types of sentences, theprocessing times for which would not be expected to differ. However, if theprocessing of empty subjects requires extra time, then all three types of sentences
should display the same or similar processing times.
Experiments 1–3 focused only on the identification of empty subjects. However, apossible factor influencing the outcome of the present study remained the aspect of
discourse-level computation, i.e., speech acts. As base sentences without particles canbe understood as simple assertions, they were judged to be correct or incorrect based
simply on their syntactic and semantic well-formedness. In contrast, sentences withthe attachment of two types of particles might be associated with certain types ofspeech acts. As such, it was expected that without any effort to identify empty
subjects, sentences with -yo would most likely be understood as informative usage
whereas sentences with -ne would be interpreted as either confirmation or request
for confirmation/agreement usage. Due to the ambiguity of -ne, sentences with thisparticle might require a longer processing time than those with -yo. In other words,
any findings of difference between -yo and -ne in Experiments 1 and 2 could notdisassociate factors of processing time caused by the identification of empty subjects
or discourse-level computation.
Experiment 4 was conducted to eliminate the possible involvement of speech acts
in sentence processing by utilizing base sentences with both -yo and -ne particles andovert subjects. In addition, activity verbs in the indicative past tense form were used
to avoid an interpretation of the modality volition. Furthermore, the auxiliary verb
-rasii ‘appear to’ was used to make sentences seem more natural. A base sentence
which reflects these considerations might be constructed such as Mayumi-ga kami-okitta-rasii, ‘Mayumi seems to have had her hair cut’. Two more stimulus conditions
were constructed by attaching the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne. Experiment 4
assumed that if speech acts were involved in sentence processing, sentences with-ne (more ambiguous) could be expected to require a longer processing time thanthose with -yo, both of which would probably be slower in processing times than basesentences.
Base sentences for the whole-sentence anomaly decision task in the present study
were created with the use of transitive verbs requiring agentive subjects and accusative
objects in the indicative non-past tense form in Experiments 1–3 and with indicative
past tense form in Experiment 4. However, the particles -yo and -ne can be attached toa variety of verbs and display multiple functions in modality. In the interest ofexperimental control, the present study focused only on specific types of verbs andtheir forms to create base sentences. Thus it should be noted that any findings
regarding the identification of empty subjects as determined by the particles -yo and-ne is limited to the scope of the particular sentence types selected in the present study.

4 Experiment 1
Experiment 1 tested whether or not the sentence-final particle -ne is associated withextra processing time for ambiguous empty subjects in comparison to the sentenceswith -yo and base sentences.

123

152

K. Tamaoka et al.

4.1 Method
Participants. Twenty-four graduate and undergraduate students (18 females and6 males) at Hiroshima University in Japan, all native speakers of Japanese, participated in Experiment 1. Ages ranged from 19 years and 4 months to 24 years and9 months. The average age was 20 years and 12 months with the standard deviationof 2 years and 1 month on the day of testing.
Materials. As listed in Appendix A, 30 correct, 30 incorrect, and 40 dummy sentences(a total of 100 sentences) were prepared for Experiment 1. Thirty simple two-phrase
sentences with an empty subject, such as ø terebi-o miru ‘ø watch television’,ø tegami-o kaku ‘ø write a letter’, and ø syasin-o toru ‘ø take a picture’, were prepared
for target stimuli of correct ‘yes’ responses. Based upon these base sentences, two setsof 30 more sentences were created by adding simply the particles -ne (e.g., ø terebi-omiru-ne) and -yo (e.g., ø terebi-o miru-yo). In this form, sentences still consisted of
two phrases, combining the particle with a verb such as miru-ne and miru-yo.
In the same manner, 30 different incorrect sentences were prepared for correct‘no’ responses. Again, these target sentences consisted of two phrases with empty
subjects. The 30 sentences were further divided into 15 syntactically incorrect and
15 semantically incorrect sentences, such as ø densya-no noru ‘ø get on of a train’,having the possessive particle -no and ø kitakaze-o yogosu ‘ø dirty north wind’. As in
the case of correct ‘no’ responses, the -ne (e.g., ø densya-no noru-ne) and -yo (e.g.,ø densya-no noru-yo) particles were added to these incorrect sentences.
It was expected that reading times would become shorter when participants saw
sentences containing the same words. Thus, in order to prevent the problem ofrepeatedly encountering sentences with same words, a counterbalanced design wasused to assign participants to different sentences. Three lists of sentences were given
to three groups of participants (8 each). Each list consisted of 30 sentences (10 basesentence, 10 sentences with -ne, and 10 sentences with -yo) for the correct ‘yes’
responses and 30 sentences (10 base sentence, 10 sentences with -ne, and 10 sentences with -yo) for the correct ‘no’ responses. In addition, 40 sentences (20 correctand 20 incorrect) were put in each list as dummy sentences (a total of 100 sentenceseach list), such as Kekkon-seikatu-wa barairo da ‘Married life is rosy’.
Procedure. Since target sentences consisted of only two phrases, the experimentemployed a whole-sentence anomaly decision task, by showing one sentence at atime on a computer screen. The presentation was controlled by Microsoft’s Visual
Basic 6.0 + Microsoft DirectX8 computer program. Stimuli with both ‘yes’ and ‘no’correct responses were presented to participants in random order in the center of acomputer screen 600 ms after the appearance of an asterisk ‘*’ indicating an eye
fixation point. Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and as accurately as
possible in deciding whether or not the sentences made sense, with responses foreach registered by pressing a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ button. Twenty-four practice trials were
given to the participants prior to the commencement of actual testing.
4.2 Analysis and results
There were no extremes in reaction times for sentence correctness decisions (i.e.,less than 300 ms or longer than 3,000 ms). Only stimulus items which received
correct responses were used in the analyses of reaction times. The means of correct123

Identifying empty subjects

153

Table 2 Reaction times and error rates of correctness decisions for sentences ending with theparticles -yo and -ne in Experiment 1

Response type

Yes responses
No responses

Sentence type

Base sentenceWith -yo (only I)With -ne (I or you)
Base sentenceWith -yo (only I)With -ne (I or you)

Reaction time (ms)Error rate (%)

M

SD

M

SD

778
841
886
1086
1052
1092

137
148
159
246
192
273

3.75%
2.92%
1.25%
5.42%
7.92%
4.17%

4.95%
5.50%
3.38%
7.79%
8.33%
5.04%

Note: 24 subjects and 30 sentences for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses in each category‘yes’ and ‘no’ reaction times and error rates for sentence correctness decisions arepresented in Table 2. Before performing the analysis, reaction times outside of 2.5
standard deviations at both the high and low ranges were replaced by boundaries
indicated by 2.5 standard deviations from the individual means of participants ineach category. The statistical tests which follow analyze both subject (F1) and item
(F2) variability.
A series of one-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) with repeated measures forthree sentence types (base, -yo, and -ne) of correct ‘yes’ responses was conducted
on reaction times (milliseconds) and error rates (percents), using subject (F1) anditem (F2) variabilities. The results showed a significant main effect for sentence
types in reaction times [F1(2, 46) = 9.10, p < .001; F2(2, 58) = 9.92, p < .001] but
not in error rates [F1(2, 46) = 2.09, p ¼ .135; F2(2, 58) = 1.59, p ¼ .214]. Simple
contrast comparisons were applied to the means of reaction times among the three
types of sentences. The mean of base sentences without any particle was comparedto the same sentences with the particles -ne and -yo. The results indicated that thebase sentences were processed faster than those with -ne [F1(1, 23) = 5.77, p < .05;
F2(1, 29) = 5.63, p < .05] and with -yo [F1(1, 23) = 5.31, p < .05; F2(1, 29) = 14.00,
p < .001], confirming the extra processing load required for the processing of thesentence-final particles attached to the base sentences. Furthermore, a curtail
finding was that the sentences with -yo were processed faster than those with -ne[F1(1, 23) = 4.29, p < .05; F2(1, 29) = 8.14, p < .01].
The same ANOVAs were carried out for correct ‘no’ responses on reaction times
and error rates. The main effect of sentence types was not significant either inreaction times [F1(2, 46) = 0.94, p ¼ .399; F2(2, 58) = 0.48, p ¼ .620] or in error rates[F1(2, 46) = 1.57, p ¼ .218; F2(2, 58) = 1.07, p ¼ .350]. The results suggest that thethree types of sentences did not differ in speed and accuracy for properly rejecting
incorrect sentences.
4.3 Discussion
The results of Experiment 1 revealed how three types of sentences were processed.
First, sentences with the ending particles -yo and -ne attached required extra processing time compared to their counter group of base sentences even though theparticles consisted of only a single Japanese hiragana moraic symbol, which was

123

154

K. Tamaoka et al.

expected to have only a minor effect in terms of orthographic processing. Second,sentences with particle -ne needed a longer processing time than those with -yo.
Sentences with -ne can be interpreted as requiring extra processing time due to theambiguity of potential subject (i.e., empty subject), either ‘I’ or ‘you’. In contrast, thesentences with -yo were quickly processed because their empty subject is identified
only as ‘I’. If this interpretation is true, any difference in reaction times should
disappear when neither type of sentence requires -yo and -ne to identify the empty
subject. To test this assumption, Experiment 2 attached the auxiliary verb -ou
meaning ‘let us’ or ‘let’s’ just before -yo and -ne as in -ou-yo and -ou-ne. Since theempty subject of sentences with -ou is clearly ‘we’, the processing times of both typesof -yo and -ne sentences should be equalized.
5 Experiment 2
Experiment 2 investigated whether the attachment of the auxiliary verb -ou ‘let us’neutralizes the difference in reaction times between sentences including -yo and -ne
found in Experiment 1.
5.1 Method
Participants. None of the participants in Experiment 2 was involved in Experiment 1.
Twenty-four graduate and undergraduate students (19 females and 5 males) at
Hiroshima University in Japan, all native speakers of Japanese, participated inExperiment 2. Ages ranged from 18 years and 2 months to 27 years and 8 months.
The average age was 21 years and 4 months with the standard deviation of 7 years
and 8 months on the day of testing.
Materials. The same base and dummy sentences used in Experiment 1 were utilized forExperiment 2. As for correct ‘yes’ responses, the auxiliary verb -ou was added to 30 twophrase base sentences (see Appendix) just before the particle -yo and -ne. The examplesof the sentences include ø terebi-o mi-y-ou-ne and ø terebi-o mi-y-ou-yo, both of whichhave the same invitational meaning ‘Let’s watch television!’ Using this procedure,
30 sentences in each of the three conditions (i.e., base, -yo and -ne) were created.
In the same manner, the same 30 incorrect sentences used in Experiment 1 werealso adapted for correct ‘no’ responses in Experiment 2. With the auxiliary verb -ou,
syntactically incorrect sentences were created like ø densya-no nor-ou-yo ‘Let’s geton of a train’, having a possessive particle no while semantically incorrect sentenceswere created such as ø kitakaze-o yogos-ou-ne ‘Let’s dirty north wind’. As in
Experiment 1, in order to prevent repeating the same sentences, a counterbalanced
design was used to assign participants to different sentences.
Procedure. Same as Experiment 1.
5.2 Analysis and results
There were no extremes in reaction times for sentence correctness decisions (lessthan 300 ms or longer than 3,000 ms). Only stimulus items which received correct
responses were used in the analyses of reaction times. The means of correct ‘yes’ and‘no’ reaction times and error rates for sentence correctness decisions are presented
in Table 3. Before performing the analysis, reaction times outside of 2.5 standard

123

Identifying empty subjects

155

Table 3 Reaction times and error rates of correctness decisions for sentences ending with -ou-yo
and -ou-ne in Experiment 2

Response type

Yes responses
No responses

Sentence type

Base sentenceWith -ou-yo
With -ou-ne
Base sentenceWith -ou-yo
With -ou-ne

Reaction time (ms)Error rate (%)

M

SD

M

SD

763
806
832
975
1007
1015

103
86
104
133
123
113

1.67%
1.25%
1.67%
4.58%
5.00%
4.17%

4.32%
5.03%
4.32%
7.69%
9.63%
7.58%

Note: 24 subjects and 30 sentences for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses in each category

deviations in both the high and low ranges were replaced by the boundaries
indicated by 2.5 standard deviations from the individual means of participants ineach category.
A series of ANOVAs with repeated measures for three sentence types (base, -ou-yo,
and -ou-ne) of correct ‘yes’ responses was conducted on reaction times and error rates,
using subject (F1) and item (F2) variabilities. The results showed a significant main effectof sentence types in reaction times [F1(2, 46) ¼ 5.41, p < .01; F2(2, 58) ¼ 10.37, p < .001]
but not in error rates [F1(2, 46) ¼ 0.11, p ¼ .899; F2(2, 58) ¼ 0.11, p ¼ .898]. Simple
contrast comparisons were applied to the means of reaction times. The mean of basesentences without any particle was compared to the same sentences with -ou-yo and-ou-ne. The results indicated that the base sentences were processed faster than thosewith -ou-ne [F1(1, 23) ¼ 11.29, p < .01; F2(1, 29) ¼ 18.39, p < .001] and with -ou-yo[F1(1, 23) ¼ 4.52, p < .05; F2(1, 29) ¼ 9.66, p < .01], confirming the extra processing load
for the combination of the auxiliary verb -ou and the particles attached to the basesentences. However, there was no significant difference between sentences with -ou-yo
and -ou-ne [F1(1, 23) ¼ 1.35, p ¼ .257; F2(1, 29) ¼ 2.64, p ¼ .115].
The same ANOVAs were carried out for correct ‘no’ responses on reaction times
and error rates. The main effect of sentence types was not significant either inreaction times [F1(2, 46) = 1.44, p ¼ .248; F2(2, 58) ¼ 1.39, p ¼ .257] or in error rates[F1(2, 46) ¼ 0.07, p ¼ .934; F2(2, 58) = 0.08, p ¼ .925]. The results suggest that thethree types of sentences did not differ in speed and accuracy for properly rejecting
incorrect sentences.
5.3 Discussion
Experiment 2 was conducted to ascertain whether the insertion of the auxiliary verb
-ou before the particles -yo and -ne diminishes the ambiguity effects of empty subjects that had been observed in Experiment 1. The result of Experiment 2 indicatesthat differences in reaction times between the sentences with -ou-yo and -ou-ne were
not observed. Both type of the sentences with -yo and -ne took longer to process
than the base sentences. Since -ou provides information to determine the empty
subject as ‘we’ in the form of the invitation ‘let us’, the particles -yo and -ne are nolonger necessary to identify the empty subject. As a result, the ambiguity effectobserved in Experiment 1 disappeared in Experiment 2.

123

156

K. Tamaoka et al.

The study provided the assumption of base sentences as ‘defaults’ in being simple
assertion (or citation-like) form. Due to the lack of clues, identification of the empty
subject is not implicated in the processing of these base sentences. However, there is
still another possibility, contrary to the assumption of the defaults, that the results ofExperiment 2 and, to some extent, Experiment 1 could simply be created by theprocessing effects of an extra word added to the base sentences. To test orthographic-length effects, three types of sentences ending with -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne,
all of which have the easily identifiable empty subject ‘we’, were compared inExperiment 3. If the results of processing times proved to be due to simple orthographic-length effects, sentences with -ou should be processed faster than sentenceswith -ou-yo and -ou-ne.

6 Experiment 3
Experiment 3 investigated whether the attachments of -yo and -ne at the end of basesentences plus -ou (i.e., orthographic-length effects) influences the processing time.
6.1 Method
Participants. None of the participants in Experiments 1 and 2 was involved inExperiment 3. Twenty-seven graduate and undergraduate students (10 females and17 males) at Kyushu University in Japan, all native speakers of Japanese, participated in Experiment 3. Ages ranged from 18 years and 8 months to 31 years and3 months. The average age was 22 years and 5 months with the standard deviation of
3 years and 5 months on the day of testing.
Materials. The same base and dummy sentences used in Experiment 1 were utilized
for Experiment 3. As for correct ‘yes’ responses, three types of sentences were used.
First, the auxiliary verb -ou was added to all 30 two-phrase base sentences. Second,
the particle -yo was added to the sentences with -ou, and likewise, the particle -ne
was added to the sentences with -ou. Examples of these sentences include ø terebi-omi-y-ou, ø terebi-o mi-y-ou-ne, and ø terebi-o mi-y-ou-yo. In the same manner, thesame 30 incorrect base sentences used in Experiment 1 were also adapted for correct‘no’ responses in Experiment 3 by adding the auxiliary verb -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne.
In order to prevent repeating the same sentences, as in Experiments 1 and 2, acounterbalanced design was used to assign participants to different sentences.
Procedure. Same as Experiments 1 and 2.
6.2 Analysis and results
There were no extremes in reaction times for sentence correctness decisions (lessthan 300 ms or longer than 3,000 ms). Only stimulus items which received correct
responses were used in the analyses of reaction times. The means of correct ‘yes’ and‘no’ reaction times and error rates for sentence correctness decisions are presented
in Table 4. Before performing the analysis, reaction times outside of 2.5 standard
deviations in both the high and low ranges were replaced by the boundaries indicated by 2.5 standard deviations from the individual means of participants in eachcategory.

123

Identifying empty subjects

157

Table 4 Reaction times and error rates for correctness decision of sentences with an auxiliary verb
-ou and the particles -yo and -ne in Experiment 3

Response type

Yes responses
No responses

Sentence type

With -ouWith -ou+yo
With -ou+ne
With -ouWith -ou+yo
With -ou+ne

Reaction time (ms)Error rate (%)

M

SD

M

SD

871
894
918
1013
1054
1058

146
160
180
169
160
166

1.11%
1.85%
0.37%
5.56%
7.78%
8.89%

3.20%
4.83%
1.92%
9.74%
14.23%
11.21%

Note: 27 subjects and 30 sentences for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses in each category

A series of ANOVAs with repeated measures for three sentence types (-ou,-ou-ne, and -ou-yo) of correct ‘Yes’ responses was conducted on reaction times anderror rates, using subject (F1) and item (F2) variabilities. The results showed no significant main effect of sentence types either in reaction times [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.66,
p ¼ .200; F2(2, 58) ¼ 1.84, p ¼ .169] or in error rates [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.10, p ¼ .342;
F2(2, 58) ¼ 2.52, p ¼ .089]. The same ANOVAs were carried out for correct ‘no’responses on reaction times and error rates. Again, the main effect of sentence types
was not significant either in reaction times [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.72, p ¼ .191; F2(2, 58) ¼ 1.32,
p ¼ .276] or in error rates [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.39, p ¼ .258; F2(2, 58) ¼ 1.33, p ¼ .273]. The
results suggest that the three types of sentences did not differ in speed and accuracy for
accepting correct sentences and for rejecting incorrect sentences.
6.3 Discussion
Experiment 3 was conducted to ascertain whether or not orthographic length ofsentences influences sentence processing. The results showed no differences among
the three types of sentences ending with -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne. Since the orthographic difference in both conditions of Experiments 1 (the base sentence) and 3(the base sentence plus -ou) was caused by the addition of the particles -yo and -ne,the difference in reaction times observed in Experiment 1 are apparently created by
the inherent ambiguity of the empty subject with the attachment of the particle -ne.
As such, the findings of Experiment 3 supported those of Experiment 1.
7 Experiment 4
To eliminate the possible involvement of discourse-level computation (i.e., speechacts) by utilizing base sentences with both -yo and -ne particles and overt subjects,
Experiment 4 investigated whether the attachments of -yo and -ne at the end of basesentences plus the auxiliary verb -rasii ‘appear to’ influenced processing time.
7.1 Method
Participants. None of the participants in Experiments 1 through 3 was involved inExperiment 4. Twenty-seven graduate and undergraduate students (12 females and

123

158

K. Tamaoka et al.

15 males) at Hiroshima University in Japan, all native speakers of Japanese,participated in Experiment 4. Ages ranged from 18 years and 10 months to 24 years
and 5 months. The average age was 20 years and 8 months with the standard
deviation of 1 years and 8 months on the day of testing.
Materials. Base sentences are listed in Appendix B. The same dummy sentences usedin Experiment 1 were utilized for Experiment 4. As for correct ‘yes’ responses, three
types of sentences were used. First, the auxiliary verb -rasii ‘appear to’ was added toall 30 three-phrase base sentences with past tense activity verbs. Second, the particle-yo was added to sentences with -rasii, and, likewise, the particle -ne was added tothose with -rasii. Examples of these sentences include Hiroko-ga syoosetu-o ka-itarasii ‘Hiroko seems to have written a novel’, Hiroko-ga syoosetu-o ka-ita-rasii-yo,
and Hiroko-ga syoosetu-o ka-ita-rasii-ne. In the same manner, the same 30 incorrectbase sentences were also adapted for correct ‘no’ responses in Experiment 4 byadding the auxiliary verb -rasii, -rasii-yo, and -rasii-ne. In order to prevent repeating
the same sentences, as in Experiments 1–3, a counterbalanced design was used toassign participants to different sentences.
Procedure. Same as Experiments 1 to 3.
7.2 Analysis and results
There were no extremes in reaction times for sentence correctness decisions (lessthan 400 ms or longer than 4,000 ms). Only stimulus items which received correct
responses were used in the analyses of reaction times. The means of correct ‘yes’ and‘no’ reaction times and error rates for sentence correctness decisions are presented inTable 5. Before performing the analysis, reaction times outside of 2.5 standard
deviations in both the high and low ranges were replaced by the boundaries indicatedby 2.5 standard deviations from the individual means of participants in each category.
A series of ANOVAs with repeated measures for three sentence types (-rasii,-rasii-yo, and -rasii-ne) of correct ‘yes’ responses was conducted on reaction times
and error rates, using subject (F1) and item (F2) variabilities. The results showed nosignificant main effect of sentence types either in reaction times [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.40,
p < .256; F2(2, 58) ¼ 3.02, p ¼ .056] or in error rates [F1(2, 52) ¼ 2.08, p ¼ .135;
Table 5 Reaction times and error rates for correctness decision of sentences with overt subjects, anauxiliaryn verb -rasii and the particles -yo and -ne in Experiment 4

Response type

Yes responses
No responses

Sentence type

With -rasii
With -rasii+yoWith -rasii+ne
With -rasii
With -rasii+yoWith -rasii+ne

Reaction time (ms)Error rate (%)

M

SD

M

SD

1323
1331
1366
1531
1583
1580

338
343
347
395
373
420

4.44%
1.48%
3.70%
6.67%
10.00%
8.15%

8.01%
6.02%
6.88%
9.61%
12.09%
10.39%

Note: 27 subjects and 30 sentences for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses in each category

123

Identifying empty subjects

159

F2(2, 58) ¼ 2.36, p ¼ .104]. The same ANOVAs were carried out for correct ‘No’
responses on reaction times and error rates. Again, the main effect of sentence types
was not significant either in reaction times [F1(2, 52) ¼ 1.58, p ¼ .216; F2(2, 58) ¼
0.31, p ¼ .736] or in error rates [F1(2, 52) ¼ 0.86, p ¼ .431; F2(2, 58) ¼ .75, p ¼ .476].
The results suggest that the three types of sentences did not differ in speed andaccuracy for accepting correct sentences and for rejecting incorrect sentences.
7.3 Discussion
Using base sentences with overt subjects and the auxiliary verb -rasii, Experiment 4
was conducted to eliminate the possibility of discourse-level computation affecting
sentence processing with the particles -yo and -ne. The results revealed that all three
conditions for base sentences, those with -yo and those with -ne required the sameprocessing times. Therefore, as revealed in the results of Experiment 1, the sentencefinal particles -yo and -ne must act as key factors for identifying empty subjects.

8 General discussion
Four experiments in the present study were carried out to examine whether or not
the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne were used for the identification of empty
subjects and, if so, how these particles functioned.
Experiment 1 showed that extra processing time was required for sentences with-yo and -ne in comparison to their base sentences. Sentences with -yo were, furthermore, processed faster than the same sentences with -ne. The explanation forthese results is twofold. First, a base sentence like ø terebi-o miru ‘ø watch television’is a simple assertion acting as a ‘default’, which would hold no implication toward
the identification of empty subjects. Thus native Japanese speakers terminatedsentence processing in these cases due to a lack of cues to identify empty subjects.
Second, as shown in Fig. 1, the yo/ne phrase provided cues for identifying an empty
subject. Here it was assumed that the yo/ne phrase projects a kind of the modality
phrase (YoNeP). In the case of -yo, native Japanese speakers receive information
concerning the desire to watch television held by the speaker (i.e., -yo informative
usage in Table 1) and then are able to identify the empty subject as ‘I’. Likewise,
native Japanese speakers try to identify an empty subject when occurring with theparticle -ne. However, in the context of the sentences given in Experiment 1, thepossessor of information can be ‘I’ or ‘you’; the empty subject thus becomesambiguous. This ambiguity results in a greater delay in the processing of sentenceswith -ne compared to those with -yo. Thus Experiment 1 confirmed that native
Japanese speakers utilize the particles -yo and -ne to identify an empty subject.
Experiment 2 was designed to confirm the results of Experiment 1. If ambiguity is
the true reason for finding that sentences with the particle -ne require more processing time than the same sentences with -yo, then removing the ambiguity of thesubject should result in equal processing times for both particles. With this logic in
mind, Experiment 2 inserted the volitional auxiliary verb -ou, making the subject of
the sentences clearly ‘we’, and in turn revealed that, in fact, difference in processing
times between the sentences with -yo and -ne disappeared. In addition, as with
Experiment 1, sentences with -ou-yo and -ou-ne took longer to process than basesentences.

123

160

Fig. 1

K. Tamaoka et al.

Identifying the empty subject by the particles -yo and -ne

The explanation for sentence processing in Experiment 2 by native Japanese
speakers is as follows. As shown in Fig. 2, native Japanese speakers process a part ofthe base sentence ø terebi-o miru ‘ø watch television’ and then read -ou, whichindicates an empty subject ‘we’. Up to this point, the sentence ‘Let’s watch television’ is completed without reading -yo and -ne. As a result, the difference in processing time between -yo and -ne observed in Experiment 1 disappeared inExperiment 2. As assumed in Experiment 1, the processing of base sentences was
terminated as there is no cue for identifying an empty subject. Thus, in this sense, thepresent study considered base sentences as ‘defaults’: native Japanese speakers madecorrectness decisions for base sentences without clarifying empty subjects.
The ‘default’ assumption needed to be tested, however, because the possibility
remained that the results in Experiments 1 and 2 were simply created by the123Identifying empty subjects

161

YoNeP

MP

YoNe

IP

M

NP

I'

VP

ø

I

NP

V

te re bi- o

mi

ru/ta

ou

yo/ne

Identifying the emtpy subject
Fig. 2

Identifying the empty subject by the auxillary verb -ou

presence of extra script (-yo or -ne in Experiment 1 and -ou-yo or -ou-ne inExperiment 2) added to the base sentences. Experiment 3 was therefore carried out
to test this orthographic-length effect by comparing three types of sentences ending
with -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne, all of which provided ‘we’ as an empty subject. The
results in Experiment 3 showed no differences among the three types of sentences
and hence ascertained that quicker processing times for base sentences were notevidence of orthographic-length effects. By proving null effects, the processing ofempty subjects as proposed for the results in Experiments 1 and 2 stands out as apersuasive explanation.
Sentences with attachment of the particles -yo and -ne might be associated withthe discourse-level computation or speech acts. If so, it would be expected that
sentences with -yo would be understood as informative usage whereas sentenceswith -ne would be either confirmation or request of confirmation/agreement usage,
without any effort given to the identification of empty subjects. Thus Experiment 4

123

162

Fig. 3

K. Tamaoka et al.

Sentence structure with an overt subject

was conducted to eliminate the possible involvement of discourse-level computationfrom the identification of empty subjects found thus far in Experiments 1–3. To
accomplish this, overt subjects were included in stimulus sentences. An example of abase sentence is Hiroko-ga syoosetu-o kaita-rasii ‘Hiroko seems to have written anovel’ as depicted in Fig. 3. In this sentence, a female subject by the name of Hiroko
is clearly shown in the beginning of the sentence. The verb kaita ‘wrote’ is presented
in the past tense to avoid an interpretation of the modality volition. The auxiliaryverb -rasii ‘appear to’ was used to make a sentence seem more natural. Two moreconditions were constructed by attachment of the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne
as in Hiroko-ga syoosetu-o kaita-rasii-yo/ne. Sentences with -ne were expected to be
more ambiguous than those with -yo in modality. Thus, if the discourse-level computation is involved, sentences with -ne were expected to require a longer processing
time than those with -yo. However, the results of Experiment 4 displayed no difference among conditions of base sentences, those with -yo, and those with -ne,suggesting that the discourse-level computation per se does not affect the processingof sentences with the particle -yo and -ne. Consequently, as found and confirmed inExperiments 1–3, the particles -yo and -ne trigger the identification of empty subjects
during sentence processing.

123

Identifying empty subjects

163

In summary, the present study proved that native Japanese speakers utilize themodality information of the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne as a cue for identifying an empty subject in sentence processing. More specifically, although thescope of present study was limited to a consideration of the processing of simple
sentences with activity verbs of indicative non-past tense form requiring agentive
subjects, the results of Experiments 1–4 yielded clear findings in regards to theidentification of empty subjects by native Japanese speakers. First, the particle -ne
showed ambiguity effects, resulting in a greater delay in sentence processing than -yo
because it provides cues of both ‘I’ and ‘you’ for empty subjects. Second, the empty
subject ‘we’ from the auxiliary verb -ou can be found without referring to the particle-yo or -ne. Third, base sentences, considered as ‘defaults’, exhibited the shortest
processing times due to a lack of cues for a specific empty subject understood as asimple assertion. Fourth, discourse-level computation seems not to involve the above
dynamics, at least under the sentence conditions of the present study. All together,
these findings indicate that the processing of sentences with -yo/-ne is affected by thestatus of empty subjects. This, in turn, proves that modality information provided by
the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne plays an important role in identifying theunexpressed subject. Thus the present study showed that native Japanese speakers
make use of various levels of information including modality.
Appendix
Appendix A Base sentences used for stimuli of Experiments 1, 2 and 3(a) Base sentences for correct yes responses (i.e., correct sentences)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

テレビを見る。
犬を飼う。
音楽を聴く。
手紙を書く。
ＣＤを買う。
ケーキを作る。
写真を撮る。
パソコンを習う。

Terebi-o miru.
Inu-o kau.
Ongaku-o kiku.
Tegami-o kaku.
CD-o kau.
Keeki-o tukuru.
Syasyin-o toru.
Pasokon-o narau.

9
10
11
12

荷物を運ぶ。
ゴミを捨てる。
ボールを蹴る。
ゆかたを着る。

Nimotu-o hakobu.
Gomi-o suteru.
Booru-o nageru.
Yukata-o kiru.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

新聞を読む。
警察を呼ぶ。
洗濯物をたたむ。
プレゼントを贈る。
本を探す。
うたを歌う。
お金を数える。
漢字を覚える。

Syinbun-o yomu.
Keisatu-o yobu.
Sentakumono-o tatamu.
Purezento-o okuru.
Hon-o sagasu.
Uta-o utau.
Okane-o kazoeru.
Kanzi-o oboeru.

Watch television.
Have a dog.
Listen to music.
Write a letter.
Buy a CD.
Bake a cake.
Take a picture.
Learn how to
use a computer.
Carry a bag.
Dump garbage.
Kick a ball.
Wear a yukata(Japanese clothing).
Read a newspaper.
Call the police.
Fold laundry.
Send a present.
Look for a book.
Sing a song.
Count money.
Learn kanji.

123

164

K. Tamaoka et al.

Appendix A continued

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

お母さんを手伝う。
芋を焼く。
家賃を払う。
スープを温める。
車を洗う。
ピアノを弾く。
熱を計る。
歯を磨く。
テストを受ける。
ビデオを借りる。

Okaasan-o tetudau.
Imo-o yaku.
Yatyin-o harau.
Suupu-o atatameru.
Kuruma-o arau.
Piano-o hiku.
Netu-o hakaru.
Ha-o migaku.
Tesuto-o ukeru.
Bideo-o kariru.

Help one's mother.
Bake potatoes.
Pay rent.
Warm soup.
Wash a car.
Play the piano.
Gauge temperature.
Brush teeth.
Take a test.
Rent a video.

(b) Base sentences for correct no responses (i.e., incorrect sentences)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

飴が舐める。
水が撒く。
畑が耕す。
お金が貯める。
道具が使う。
結婚を殺す。
アフリカを噛む。
ドライブをちぎる。
忠告を冷ます。
北風を汚す。
電車の降りる。
みこしの担ぐ。

Ame-ga nameru.
Mizu-ga maku.
Hatake-ga tagayasu.
Okane-ga tukau.
Doogu-ga tukau.
Kekkon-o korosu.
Ahurika-o kamu.
Doraibu-o tyigiru.
Tyuukoku-o samasu.
Kitakaze-o yogosu.
Densya-no oriru.
Mikosi-no katugu.

A candy licks.
Water sprinkles.
Field cultivates.
Money keeps.
Instruments use.
Kill marriage.
Bit Africa.
Tear driving.
Cool an advice.
Dirty the north wind.
Get off of a street car.
Carry on of portableshrine.
背中のなでる。
Senaka-no naderu.
Pet of the back.
帽子のかぶる。
Boosi-no kaburu.
Wear of a hat.
野菜の切る。
Yasai-no kiru.
Cut of vegetables.
満月を泳ぐ。
Mangetu-o oyogu.
Swim the full moon.
クリスマスを走る。 Kurisumasu-o hasiru.
Run the Christmas.
アルプスをつまむ。 Arupusu-o tumamu.
Pick the Alps.
幸運を沸かす。
Kooun-o wakasu.
Boil happiness.
海を回す。
Umio mawasu.
Turn the ocean.
バスに待つ。
Basu-ni matu.
Wait to a bus.
橋に渡る。
Hasi-ni wataru.
Cross to the bridge.
映画に観る。
Eiga-ni miru.
See to the movie.
要求に呑む。
Yookuu-ni nomu.
Accept to a request.
植木に抜く。
Ueki-ni nuku.
Pull to the plant.
経験を倒す。
Keiken-o taosu.
Knock down experience.
田舎生活を刺す。
Inakaseikatu-o sasu.
Thrust country life.
人生を殴る。
Zinsei-o naguru.
Strike life.
卒業を抱える。
Sotugyoo-o kakaeru.
Hold graduation.
電話番号を歩く。
Denwabangoo-o aruku. Walk a telephone number.

Note: The experimental conditions were created by attaching the particle yo and ne to the end of theabove 60 base sentences for Experiment 1, and by attaching -ou-yo and -ou-ne for Experiments 2
and 3. In addition, 40 dummy sentences were added for the experiments

123

Identifying empty subjects

165

Appendix B Base sentences used for stimuli of Experiment 4(a) Base sentences for correct yes responses (i.e., correct sentences)
1

ケンジが家を買ったらしい。

2

ナオミが賞をもらったらしい。

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Kenzi-ga ie-okatta-rasii.

Naomi-gasyoo-o moratta-rasii.
ヒロコが小説を書いたらしい。
Hiroko-ga
syosetu-okaita-rasii
タケシがマンションを売ったらしい。 Takesi-ga
mansyon-o
utta-rasii
マユミが髪を切ったらしい。
Mayumi-ga
kami-okitta-rasii
アキラが足を骨折したらしい。
Akira-ga asi-okossetusita-rasii
マドカが恋人をふったらしい。
Madoka-ga
koibito-ohutta-rasii
クミコが子猫を拾ったらしい。
Kumiko-ga
koneko-ohirotta-rasii
ヒデキが部活を始めたらしい。
Hideki-ga
bukatu-ohazimeta-rasii
Yasuo-ga
ヤスオが風邪をひいたらしい。
kaze-ohiita -rasii
ケンジが父親を亡くしたらしい。
Kenzi-gatitioya-onakusita-rasii.
ナオミが子どもを産んだらしい。
Naomi-ga
kodomo-ounda-rasii.
ヒロコが事故を起こしたらしい。
Hiroko-ga
ziko-ookosita-rasii
タケシが借金を返したらしい。
Takesi-ga
syakkin-okaesita-rasii
マユミが個展を開いたらしい。
Mayumi-ga
koten-ohiraita-rasii

Kenzi seems tohave purchased
a house.
Naomi seems
to have received
an award
Hiroko seems
to have written
a novel.
Takesi seems
to have sold his
mansion.
Mayumi seems
to have had herhair cut
Akira seems
to have broken
his leg.
Madoka seems
to have thrownover her boyfriend
Kumiko seems
to have pickeda kitty up.
Hideki seems
to have started his
club avtivity.
Yasuo seems
to have caught
a cold.
Kenzi seems
to have lost his
father.
Naomi seems
to have delivereda baby.
Hiroko seems
to have had an
accident.
Takesi seems
to have payed off
his debts.
Mayumi seems
to have hold anindividual show.

123

166

K. Tamaoka et al.

Appendix B continued

16

アキラが手術を受けたらしい。

17

マドカが嘘をついたらしい。

18

クミコが仕事を辞めたらしい。

19

ヒデキが刑期を終えたらしい。

20

ヤスオが自伝を出版したらしい。

21

ケンジが財布を落としたらしい。

22

ナオミが宝くじをあてたらしい。

23

ヒロコが大学を卒業したらしい。

24

タケシが泥棒を捕まえたらしい。

25

マユミが着を着たらしい。

26

アキラが失敗を認めたらしい。

27

マドカが産休を取ったらしい。

28

クミコが約束を破ったらしい。

29

ヒデキが先輩を殴ったらしい。

30

ヤスオが仲間を裏切ったらしい。

123

Akira-gashyzyutu-o
uketa-rasii
Madoka-ga
uso-o
tuita-rasii
Kumiko-ga
sigoto-oyameta-rasii
Hideki-ga
keiki-ooeta-rasii
Yasuo-gaziden-o syuppansita-rasii
Kenzi-gasaihu-ootosita-rasii
Naomi-gatakarakuzi-oateta-rasii
Hiroko-ga
daigaku-osotugyoositarasii
Takesi-ga doroboo-o tukamaeta-rasii
Mayumi-ga
kimono-okita-rasii
Akira-ga
sippai-o mitometa-rasii
Madoko-ga
sankyuu-o
totta-rasii
Kumiko-ga
yakusoku-oyabutta-rasii
Hideki-ga
senpai-onagutta-rasii
Yasuo-ganakama-ouragitta-rasii

Akira seems tohave had an
operation.
Madoka seems tohave told a lie.
Kumiko seems tohave quited her
job.
Hideki seems tohave served his
term in prison.
Yasuo seems tohave published his
autobiography.
Kenzi seems tohave lost his
wallet.
Naomi seems tohave won alottery.
Hiroko seems tohave graduatedfrom a university.
Takesi seems tohave caught athief.
Mayumi seems tohave dressed akimono.
Akira seems tohave admitted his
fault.
Madoka seems tohave had hermaternity leave.
Kumiko seems tohave broken her
promise.
Hideki seems tohave hit his
senior.
Yasuo seems tohave betrayed his
friend.

Identifying empty subjects

167

Appendix B continued(b) Base sentences for correct no responses (i.e., incorrect sentences)1

ハジメが飴に舐めたらしい。

2

サトコが水の撒いたらしい。

3

アユミが畑に耕したらしい。

4

シンゴがお金に貯めたらしい。

5

タクヤが道具と使ったらしい。

6

ヤスコをバスに待ったらしい。

7

メグミを橋に渡ったらしい。

8

レイコを映画に観たらしい。

9

テツヤを要求にのんだらしい。

10

ユキオを植木に抜いたらしい。

11

ハジメがみこしの担いだらしい。

12

サトコが電車の降りたらしい。

13

アユミが背中のなでたらしい。

14

シンゴが帽子にかぶったらしい。

Hazime-ga
ame-ni
nameta-rasii
Satoko-ga
mizu-nomaita-rasii
Ayumi-gahatake-ni
tagayasita-rasii
Singo-gaokane-nitameta-rasii
Takuya-ga
dougu-totukatta-rasii
Yasuko-obasu-nimatta-rasii
Megumi-o
hasi-niwatatta-rasii
Reiko-oeiga-nimita-rasii
Tetuya-oyookyuu-ni
nonda-rasii
Yukio-oueki-ni
nuita-rasii
Hazime-ga
mikosi-no
katuida-rasii
Satoko-ga
densya-no
orita-rasii
Ayumi-gasenaka-no
nadeta-rasii
Singo-gabousi-nikabutta-rasii

Hazime seems tohave licked to a
candy.
Satoko seems tohave sprinkled ofwater.
Ayumi seems tohave cultivated toﬁeld.
Singo seems tohave kept tomoney.
Takuya seems tohave used with
instruments
Yasuko seems
to have waited
to a bus.
Megumi seems tohave crossed to abridge.
Reiko seems tohave seen to amovie.
Tetuya seems tohave accepted toa request.
Yukio seems tohave pull to aplant.
Hazime seems tohave carried onof portable shrine.
Satoko seems tohave got off of astreet car.
Ayumi seems tohave petted of
the back.
Singo seems tohave worn of a
hat.

123

168

K. Tamaoka et al.

Appendix B continued

15

タクヤが野菜の切ったらしい。

16

ヤスコが結婚を殺したらしい。

17

メグミがアフリカを噛んだらしい。

18

レイコがドライブを引き裂いたらしい。

19

テツヤが忠告を冷ましたらしい。

20

ユキオが北風を汚したらしい。

21

ハジメが経験を倒したらしい。

22

サトコが田舎生活を刺したらしい。

23

アユミが人生を引っかいたらしい。

24

シンゴが卒業を抱えたらしい。

25

タクヤが電話番号を歩いたらしい。

26

ヤスコが満月を泳いだらしい。

27

28

Takuya-ga
yasai-nokitta-rasii
Yasuko-ga
kekkon-okorosita-rasii
Megumi-ga
ahurika-okanda-rasii
Reiko-gadoraibu-ohikisaita-rasii
Tetuya-ga
tyuukoku-osamasita-rasii
Yukio-gakitakaze-oyogosita-rasii
Hazime-ga
keiken-otaosita-rasii
Satoko-ga
inakaseikatu-osasita-rasii
Ayumi-gazinsei-ohikkaita-rasii
Singo-gasotugyoo-ohikkaita-rasii
Takuya-ga
denwabangooo aruita-rasii

Yasuko-ga
mangetu-oaruita-rasii
メグミがクリスマスを走ったらしい。 Megumi-ga
kurisumasu-ohasitta-rasii
レイコがアルプスを摘まんだらしい。 Reiko-ga
arupusu-otumanda-rasii

123

Takuya seems tohavecut ofvegetables.
Yasuko seems tohave killedmarriage.
Megumi seems tohave bitten
Africa.
Reiko seems tohave torn driving.
Tetuya seems tohave cooled anadvice.
Yukio seems tohave dirtied thenorth wind.
Hazime seems tohave knocked
down experience.
Satoko seems tohave thrusted
country life.
Ayumi seems tohave scratchedlife.
Sinogo seems tohave held
graduation.
Takuya seems tohave walked atelephonenumber.
Yasuko seems tohave swum thefull moon.
Megumi seems tohave run theChristmas.
Reiko seems tohave picked theAlps.

Identifying empty subjects

169

Appendix B continued

29

テツヤが幸運を沸かしたらしい。

30

ユキオが海を回したらしい。

Tetuya-ga
kooun-owakasita-rasii
Yukio-gaumi-omawasita-rasii

Tetuya seems tohave boiled
hapiness.
Yukio seems tohave turned theocean.

Note: The experimental conditions were created by attaching the particle yo and ne to the end of theabove 60 base sentences for Experiment 4. In addition, 40 dummy sentences (20) correct yes and
20 correct no were added for Experiment 4

References
Akatsuka, N., & Tsubomoto, A. (1998). Modaritii to hatsuwa kooi [Modality and speech act]. Tokyo:
Kenkyuusha Shuppan.
Eda, S. (2000). A new approach to the analysis of the sentence final particles ne and yo: An interface
between prosody and pragmatics. In M. Nakayama & C. J. Quinee, Jr. (Eds.), Japanese/Korean
linguistics (Vol. 9, pp. 167–180) Stanford, California: Center for the Study of Language andInformation.
Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition,
6, 291–325.
Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Saddy D. (2003a). Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting
aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31,
45–63.
Friederici, A. D., R€
uschemeyer, S.-A., Hahne, A., & Fiebach, C. J. (2003b). The role of left inferior
frontal and superior temporal cortex in sentence comprehension: Localizing syntactic andsemantic processing. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 170–177.
Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic
analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11,
194–205.
Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2002). Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes
as revealed by ERPs. Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 339–356.
Hagoort, P. (2003). Interplay between syntax and semantics during sentence comprehension: ERP
effects of combining syntactic and semantic violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15,883–899.
Inoue, M. (1997). ‘Moshi moshi kippu-o otosaremasita-yo’: Shuujyoshi yo-o tsukaukoto-no imi[‘Excuse me, you dropped your ticket’: Meaning of the use of the ending particle -yo. Gekkan
Gengo [Monthly Journal – Language], 26(2), 62–67.
Inoue, M. (1998). Gaaden-pasu bun no yomi to bun no rikai [Reading of garden-path sentences andsentence understanding]. In N. Osaka (Ed.), Yomi: Noo to kokoro no jyoohoo shori [Reading:
Information processing of brain and mind] (pp. 721–789), Tokyo: Asakura Shoten.
Kamio, A. (1990). Jyoohoo-no nawabari riron – Gengo-no kinoo-teki bunseki [The theory of territoryof information – A functional analysis for languages]. Tokyo: Taishuukan Shoten.
Kamio, A. (1994). The theory of territory of information: The case of Japanese. Journal of
Pragmatics, 21, 67–100.
Kamio, A. (2002). Zoku jyoohoo-no nawabari riron [Sequel to the theory of territory of information].
Tokyo: Taishuukan Shoten.
Katagiri, Y. (1995). Shuujyoshi-ni yoru taiwa choosei [Dialogue coordination by sentence-final
particles]. Gekkan Gengo [Monthly Journal – Language], 24(11), 38–45.
Katagiri, Y. (1997). Shuujyoshi to intoneeshon [Japanese sentence-final particles and utterance-final
intonation]. Bunpoo to onsei [Speech and grammar], 1, 235–256.
Kinsui, S. (1993). Shuujyoshi yo ne [Final particles yo and ne]. Gekkan Gengo [Monthly Journal –Language], 22(4), 13–19.

123

170

K. Tamaoka et al.

Koizumi, M., & Tamaoka, K. (2004). Cognitive processing of Japanese sentences with ditransitive
verbs. Gengo Kenkyu [Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan], 125, 173–190.
Masuoka, T. (1991). Modaritii no bunpoo [Grammar for modality]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
Matsuoka, M. (2003). Danwaba-ni okeru shuujyoshi ‘yo’ no kinoo [Functions of the sentence-final
particle ‘yo’ in discourse]. Kotoba to Bunka [Language and Culture] (Bulletin of Graduate
School of International Language and Culture, Nagoya University), 4, 53–69.
Maynard, K. S. (1993). Kaiwa bunseki [Discourse analysis]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
Miyamoto, E. T., Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N. J. Aikawa, T., & Miyagawa, S. (1999). A U-shaped
relative clause attachment preference in Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14,
663–686.
Moriyama, T., Nitta, Y., & Kudoo, H. (2000). Nihongo-no bunpoo 3: Modaritii [Japanese Grammar
3: Modality]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Nakagome, K., Takazawa, S., Kanno., O., Hagiwara, H., Nakajima, H., Itoh, K., & Koshida, I.
(2001). A topographical study of ERP correlates of semantic and syntactic violations in theJapanese language using the multichannel EEG system. Psychophysiology, 38, 304–315.
Nakagawa, H., & Ono, S. (1996). Nihongo-no shuujyoshi-no kinoo: yo, ne, na o chuushin-ni[Function of Japanese sentence-final particles: Focusing on ‘yo’, ‘ne’ and ‘na’]. Shizen gengo
shori [Natural language processing], 3(2), 3–18.
Nitta, Y. & Masuoka, T. (1998). Nihon-go no modaritii [Japanese modality] (4th print). Tokyo:
Kuroshio Shuppan.
Ohso, M. (1986). Goyoo bunseki 1 ‘Kyoo-wa ii tenki desu ne’ ‘Hai, soo desu’ [Error analysis 1 ‘A fine
day today, isn’t it?’, ‘Yes, it is.’]. Nihongo-gaku [Studies on the Japanese Language], 15(9),91–94.
Sakamoto, T. (1995). The transparency hypothesis for parsing: On the processing of sentences withempty subjects. Ninchi Kagaku [Cognitive Studies], 2(2), 77–90.
Sakamoto, T. (1996). Processing empty subjects in Japanese: Implications for the transparency
hypothesis. Fukuoka: Kyushu University Press.
Sakamoto, T. (2002). Processing filler-gap constructions in Japanese: The case of empty subject
sentences. In M. Nakayama (Ed.), Sentence processing in East Asian languages (pp. 189–221).
Stanford, California: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Sakamoto, T. & Walenski, M. (1998). The processing of empty subject in English and Japanese. In
D. Hillert (Ed.), Syntax and semantics Vol. 31 – Sentence processing: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 95–111). San Diego California: Academic Press.
Tamaoka, K., Sakai, H., Kawahara, J - i., Miyaoka, Y., Lim H., & Koizumi, M. (2005). Priority
information used for the processing of Japanese sentences: Thematic roles, case particles orgrammatical functions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 273–324.
Takahashi, T., Kaneko, S., Kaneda, A., Saimi, T., Suzuki, Y., Suda, J., & Matsumoto, Y. (2004).
Nihongo no bunpoo [Japanese Grammar]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Takubo, Y., & Kinsui, S. (1996). Discourse management in terms of mental domains. Ninchi Kagaku[Cognitive Studies], 3(3), 59–74.
Tokimoto, S. (2005). Disambiguation of homonyms in real-time Japanese sentence processing:Case-markings and thematic constraint. Language and Speech, 48, 65–90.
Xu, X. L. (2002). Hanashi kotoba-ni okeru bunmatsu hyoogen to shuujyoshi ‘ne’ ‘yo’ no kyooki
kankei: ‘ne’ ‘yo’ ga tsukanai bunmatsu hyoogen-o chuushin-ni [The co-occurrences of sentencefinal expressions and the particles ‘ne’ and ‘yo’ in spoken language: Focus on sentence-final
expressions without attachments of ‘ne’ and ‘yo’]. Kotoba to Bunka [Language and Culture](Bulletin of Graduate School of International Language and Culture, Nagoya University), 3,
111–126

123