1. Relative clauses
11 January 2013
Based on
“A student’s Introduction to English Grammar”,
R. Huddleston, G. Pullum

2. Relative clauses as modifiers of nouns
1.The secretary wrote to [all the members who were absent from
the meeting].
2.[The film which I needed] is unobtainable.
In [1] the underlined relative clause modifies members and
combines with it to form the head nominal of the bracketed NP:
members who were absent from the meeting. Similarly in [2] the
relative clause modifies film, and film which I needed forms the
head nominal that is determined by the.
The relative clauses here are introduced by the relative pronouns
who and which, whose interpretation is provided by their
antecedents, members and film respectively. The relation
between a pronoun and its antecedent is called anaphora.

3. Relative & Content clauses
We use the symbol 'R' for the element in them that is anaphorically
related to an antecedent.
1.Relative clause They rejected the suggestion which your son made.
2.Content clause They rejected the suggestion that your son was lying.
For [1] we have "your son made R", with suggestion as the
antecedent: we understand
that your son made some suggestion, and they rejected it.
In [2], however, there is no such R element in the subordinate clause.
The clause does not contain any anaphoric link to the head noun
suggestion: it merely gives the content of the suggestion.

4. Wh and non-wh relative clauses
The relative clauses that do contain an overt anaphoric link like
who or which are called wh relatives. There are others that
don't, and they are the non-wh relatives.
1.Wh relative: The film which I needed is not obtainable.
Non-wh:
2. That relative: The film that I needed __ is not obtainable.
3. Bare relative: The film I needed is not obtainable.
Non-wh relatives with the subordinator[2] - that relatives.
The subordinator is omitted [3] - bare relatives.
There is no relative pronoun in [2] or [3], but there is still an
anaphoric relation to the head noun film; these, no less than [1],
can be represented as "I needed R", with R functioning as object
and interpreted as some film.

5. The relativised element
The overt or covert element R that is anaphorically linked to the
head noun is called the relativised element.
WH counterparts
1. Subject some friends [who saw her]
2. Object a key [which she found]
3. Comp of preposition those books [which I referred to]
4. Adjunct of time the day [when you were born]
5. Adjunct of place a place [where you can relax]
6. Adjunct of reason the reason [why she got angry]

6. Non-wh counterparts
1. Subject some friends [that _ saw her]
2. Object a key [(that) she found _]
3. Comp of preposition those books [(that) I referred to _]
4. Adjunct of time the day [(that) you were born _]
5. Adjunct of place a place [(that) you can relax _]
6. Adjunct of reason the reason [(that) she got angry _]
Where the gap is in subject position, that is not omissible. We
can have, for example, Anyone who wants this stuff can have it,
but !Anyone wants this stuff can have it is not Standard English.
R element with in an embedded clause
It is possible for the R element to be located within a content
clause embedded inside the relative clause:
i a. a key [which he says she found] b. a key [(that) he says she found_]
ii a. some boys [who he says saw her] b. some boys [(that) he says _ saw her]

7. The Relative Phrase
The relative phrase - the constituent occupying initial position in the clause;
The relativised element - the element that is anaphorically related to the
head noun, the element we have been representing as R.
Integrated vs supplementary relatives
The relative clauses considered so far have all been tightly integrated
into the structure of the NP containing them. As such, they contrast with another
kind of relative clause that is more loosely attached. This second kind we call
supplementary relative clauses. These examples illustrate the contrast:
1. Integrated Politicians who make extravagant promises
aren't trusted.
2. Supplementary Politicians, who make extravagant
promises, aren‚t trusted.

8. Relative words in integrated and supplementary
relative clauses
who whom whose which when where why
Gender: personal vs non-personal
Interrogative Relative
1. Personal Who did you see ? the person who annoys me
most
2. Non-personal What did you see ? the thing which annoys me
most
Case : nominative vs accusative
The nominative is required in subject or predicative complement function.
The complement of a fronted preposition is normally accusative (the woman
to whom he was engaged).
1. the applicants who we interviewed [nominative: informal]
2. the applicants whom we interviewed [accusative: formal]
3. the applicants (that) we interviewed [non-wh: neutral]

9. Fused relatives
1. Whoever said that was trying to mislead you. [fused relatives]
2. I 've eaten what you gave me.
Relative words in the fused construction
1. Who whom what which where when
2. Whoever whomever whatever whichever wherever whenever
Fused relatives and interrogative content clauses
1. I really liked what she wrote. [fused relative]
2. I wonder what she wrote. [interrogative content clause]
3. What she wrote is unclear. [ambiguous: relative or interrogative]

10. Exercises
1. Underline the finite subordinate clauses in the following examples and say
whether they are (a) relative clauses; (b) declarative content clauses; or (c)
ambiguous between the two. Give evidence in supportof your answers.
i She ridiculed the idea that he had proposed.
ii The fact that it 's illegal didn't seem tobother them.
iii I've lost the map that you lent me.
iv He was motivated by the conviction that he had been seriously wronged.
v They are spreading a rumor that is causing her great distress.

11. 2. Convert any non-wh relatives in the following examples into their wh
relative counterparts.
i The reason he gave was that he wanted to spend more time with his
family.
ii The reason he resigned was that he wanted to spend more time with his
family.
iii The one that impressed me most was your sister.
iv Do you remember the time we first went out together?
v The concept that the agency came up with is really insulting.
vi The notion that he came up with wasreally ingenious.
vii That 's a person I wouldn't want to cross a river with.
viii Do you have a socket wrench I could borrow ?
ix They said that the one that I wanted was sold out.
x That car made the one that I was driving look crummy.

12. 3. Determine whether the underlined expressions below are: (a) fused
relatives;(b) open interrogative content clauses; or (c) ambiguous between
the two. Give evidence to support your answer.
i I don 't know who caused the accident.
ii You can do whatever you like.
iii What she wrote is completely illegible.
iv They 've already spent what I gave them yesterday.
v I won 't be resigning, whatever the report says.
vi I told them what you told me to tell them.
vii I asked what else I could do.
viii What Frankenstein has created will one day destroy him.
ix What Frankenstein has created is so far unknown.
x We must find whoever did this.

13. Thank you for your attention!