scholarly journals Some kind of relative clause

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 163-180
Author(s):  
Jon Ander Mendia
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Special Case

Amount Relatives (ARs) differ from restrictive relative clauses in that they do notrefer to a particular object denoted by the head of the relative clause, but to an amount of suchobjects (Carlson, 1977a; Heim, 1987). Traditionally, ARs have been regarded as degree expressions.In this paper I argue against this view and propose instead that amount interpretations ofrelative clauses are in fact a special case of kind interpretation.Keywords: kind reference, amounts, relative clauses.

scholarly journals Non-restrictive relative clauses in Arabic

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Abdulrahman A Alqurashi
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Modern Standard Arabic ◽  
Standard Arabic ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives ◽  
Modern Standard ◽  
Minimalist Syntax

This paper discusses the syntax of non-restrictive relative clauses in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). It provides a thorough description of their structures and attempts to offer a preliminary analysis within the transformation framework: Minimalist syntax. Two relativization strategies are available for Arabic non-restrictive relative clauses. The first strategy is similar to that of definite restrictive relatives in which the relative clause is initiated by ʔallaðiwhich is a relative complementizer, whereas the second strategy is a unique one in which the relative clause is initiated by the special particle wa, appears to be a specifying coordinator, along with the complementizer ʔallaði. The paper also argues that De-Vries’s (2006) coordinate approach to appositive relatives can provide a straightforward account for some the facts of non-restrictive relative clauses in Arabic.

scholarly journals Relative clause comprehension revisited: commentary on Eisenberg (2002)

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 671-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
EVAN KIDD
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Real Time Processing ◽  
Time Processing ◽  
The Real ◽  
Syntactic Development ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Requirements Acquisition

Eisenberg (2002) presents data from an experiment investigating three- and four-year-old children's comprehension of restrictive relative clauses (RC). From the results she argues, contrary to Hamburger & Crain (1982), that children do not have discourse knowledge of the felicity conditions of RCs before acquiring the syntax of relativization. This note evaluates this conclusion on the basis of the methodology used, and proposes that an account of syntactic development needs to be sensitive to the real-time processing requirements acquisition places on the learner.

scholarly journals An HPSG analysis of the non-integrated wh-relative clauses in German

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anke Holler
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Subordinate Clause ◽  
Abstract Entity ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses

In this article, the so-called wh-relative clause construction is investigated. The German wh-relative clauses are syntactically relevant as they show both, root clause and subordinate clause properties. They matter semantically because they are introduced by a wh-anaphor that has to be resolved by an appropriate abstract entity of the matrix clause. Additionally, the wh-relative clause construction is discourse-functionally peculiar since it evokes coherence. Besides these interesting empirical characteristics, whrelatives raise important theoretical questions. It is argued that the standard HPSG theory has to be extended to account for non-restrictive relative clauses in general, and to cope with the particular properties of the wh-relative construction.

scholarly journals Raising and matching in Pharasiot Greek relative clauses: A diachronic reconstruction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-39
Author(s):  
METIN BAGRIACIK ◽  
LIEVEN DANCKAERT
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Landing Site ◽  
Functional Structure ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Modern Greek ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses

This paper studies the structure and origin of prenominal and postnominal restrictive relative clauses in Pharasiot Greek. Though both patterns are finite and introduced by the invariant complementizer tu, they differ in two important respects. First, corpus data reveal that prenominal relatives are older than their postnominal counterparts. Second, in the present-day language only prenominal relatives involve a matching derivation, whereas postnominal ones behave like Head-raising structures. Turning to diachrony, we suggest that prenominal relatives came into being through morphological fusion of a determiner t- with an invariant complementizer u. This process entailed a reduction of functional structure in the left periphery of the relative clause, to the effect that the landing site for a raising Head was suppressed, leaving a matching derivation as the only option. Postnominal relatives are analyzed as borrowed from Standard Modern Greek. Our analysis corroborates the idea that both raising and matching derivations for relatives must be acknowledged, sometimes even within a single language.

Child and adult construal of restrictive relative clauses: Knowledge of grammar and differential effects of syntactic context

2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
CATHY FRAGMAN ◽  
HELEN GOODLUCK ◽  
LINDSAY HEGGIE
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Mature Adult ◽  
Adult Performance ◽  
Proper Name ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Syntactic Context ◽  
Selection Of

We report four act-out experiments testing the sensitivity of adults and three- to five-year-old children to the distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in English. Specifically, we test knowledge of the fact that restrictive relative clauses cannot modify a proper name head, and of the fact that relatives introduced by that (as opposed to a wh-pronoun) are obligatorily restrictive. Both children and adults show knowledge of these properties. No support was found for the hypothesis that children extend the block on proper name heads to wh-relatives. Both children and adults are sensitive to the syntactic context (double object vs. existential) in which the relative clause is embedded. However, adults differ from children in four respects. First, in the double object context, adults are more likely than children to commit the error of construing a that relative as referring to a proper name head. Second, the effect of syntactic context on selection of a head is larger for adults than for children. Third, for adults, but not for children, the effect of syntactic context interacts with the type of relative clause. Fourth, adults, but not children, are influenced by whether they hear the existential context before the double object context. We propose that by three to four years of age children have acquired an adult-like grammar of relative clauses, and that the differences we see in child and adult performance can be attributed to that grammar in combination with a mature (adult) or immature (child) sentence processing capacity.

Descriptive relative clauses in Austro-Bavarian German

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Wiltschko
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
World Knowledge ◽  
Upper Austria ◽  
Definite Articles ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Semantic Properties

AbstractThis article discusses the syntactic and semantic properties of descriptive relative clauses, a type of relative clause discussed in the literature on Chinese. It is argued that descriptive relative clauses are found in the dialect of Upper Austria, a version of Bavarian German. In particular this dialect has a set of reduced definite articles that are used for discourse referents that are intrinsically uniquely identifiable, as a matter of world knowledge. As such, they cannot be restricted by a relative clause, where restriction is taken to exclude alternatives. Such DPs can, however, be modified by descriptive relative clauses. I propose that descriptive relative clauses attach to NP while restrictive relative clauses attach to nP. Thus, the article contributes to determining whether there are different relative clauses associated with different layers of projections in the nominal domain.

scholarly journals Split-antecedent relative clauses and the symmetry of predicates

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 253-270
Author(s):  
Claudia Poschmann ◽  
Sascha Bargmann ◽  
Christopher Götze ◽  
Anke Holler ◽  
Manfred Sailer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Coordinate Structure ◽  
Transitive Verb ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Grammatical Functions

This paper presents the results of two experiments in German testing the acceptabilityof (non-)restrictive relative clauses (NRCs/RRCs) with split antecedents (SpAs). Accordingto Moltmann (1992), SpAs are only grammatical if their parts occur within the conjuncts ofa coordinate structure and if they have identical grammatical functions. Non-conjoined SpAsthat form the subject and the object of a transitive verb are predicted to be ungrammatical. Ourstudy shows that the acceptability of such examples improves significantly if the predicate thatrelates the parts of the SpA is symmetric. Moreover, it suggests that NRCs and RRCs behavedifferently in these cases with respect to the SpA-construal. We can make sense of this observationif we follow Winter (2016) in assuming that transitive symmetric predicates have to beanalyzed as unary collective predicates and thus provide a collective antecedent for the RC atthe semantic (not the syntactic) level. As we will argue, this accounts for some of the disagreementwe found in the literature and gives us new insights into both the semantics of symmetricpredicates and the semantics of NRCs.Keywords: non-restrictive relative clause, restrictive relative clause, symmetric predicate, splitantecedent.

scholarly journals Relativizzazione e restrittività: alcuni criteri distintivi in russo

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Milani
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Colloquial Language ◽  
Island Constraints ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
National Corpus

This work discusses issues related to the syntax and semantics of relative clauses in contemporary Russian. More precisely, the study explores some differences between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses on the basis of data drawn from the Russian National Corpus and, additionally, on the basis of native speakers’ judgments. It will show the occurrences of the relative introducers čto and kotoryj investigating the nature of their possible antecedents (animacy feature), the Case-marking strategy and the Resumption phenomenon, which has been tested in colloquial language. My observations appear to support the hypothesis on a relationship, in Russian, between the Resumption strategy (that only čto-relatives license) and the non-restrictive interpretation of the relative clause, if island-constraints are not present.

scholarly journals To Raise or Not to Raise: the Case of Finnish Restrictive Relative Clauses

Nordlyd ◽  
10.7557/12.32 ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Satu Manninen
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Possessive Constructions ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives

Relative clause constructions have received very little attention in Finnish grammars. The purpose of this paper is to provide some tools for distinguishing between restrictive and appositive relatives in Finnish, and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the “standard” and raising analyses of restrictive relatives in that language. It shows that both lines of analysis are problematic for the analysis of a highly inflectional language like Finnish. The paper also contains a brief account of relative clause extraposition constructions: it points out problems in Kayne’s (1994) and Bianchi’s (1999) analysis of such data, and proposes instead that extraposition constructions, just like possessive constructions, contain a D head selecting another DP as its complement.

scholarly journals WH-extractions and relative clauses in Brazilian Portuguese

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (spe) ◽  
pp. 141-163
Author(s):  
Esmeralda Vailati NEGRÃO
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
The Other ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Generative Theory ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Special Case

This paper aims to describe and explain WH-extraction patterns out of island contexts in Brazilian Portuguese (BP), by means of the principles established by Generative Theory. I claim that BP uses a strategy for the extraction of subjects which involves a special case of Agreement. Extractions out of relative islands are possible when the extracted WH-phrase ends up in the specifier position of the higher CP and from there it behaves as the subject of the predication. The subject-predicate relationship established under agreement makes Comp a proper governor for traces in subject position under its scope. The analysis proposed makes a distinction between two processes of relative clause formation. One in which que is an operator that transforms sentences into predicates and sits in the Comp position of a CP whose specifier can be occupied by a QP functioning as the subject of the predication. The other, in which que is a WH-word, traditionally treated as a pronoun, occupying the specifier position of a QP and introducing relative clauses as we know them.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document