Table 1.
Properties of four different types of RCs in Russian
| Type | Gap Position | Embedding | Intervener between the gap and the filler | Non-canonical Word Order | Case Mismatch |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Subject-gap | Center-embedded | No | No | No |
| 2. | Object-gap | Center-embedded | No | Yes | Yes |
| 3. | Subject-gap | Right-branching | No | No | Yes |
| 4. | Object-gap | Right-branching | No | Yes | No |
Note: Greater difficulty of object-gap sentences relative to subject-gap (manifested as a main effect of Gap) would provide support for the impact of non-canonical word order; greater difficulty of center-embedded sentences relative to right branching (manifested as a main effect of embedding) would indicate that extra complexity is due to clause interruption and consequently a greater working memory load; greater difficulty of RCs with non-parallel cases (i.e., manifested as an interaction between Gap and Embedding) would provide support for the Case Matching theory.