In many current theories of human sentence processing, the mechanisms
and principles proposed to account for data related to processing (1)
long-distance dependencies and (2) structural ambiguities, such as gar
den-path sentences, are independent, despite the fact that deciding wh
ether or not to posit a gap is just a special case of ambiguity resolu
tion. In this paper we demonstrate how the parallel parsing theory pro
posed by Gibson (1991, in press)-which was developed to account for no
ngap ambiguity resolution data-also explains a number of gap-positing
facts, without additional strategies. In particular, we show how this
theory correctly explains filled-object-gap effects and the lack of fi
lled-subject-gap effects in English, as well as certain gap-processing
effects in Dutch.