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 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.

Extraposition of restrictive relative clauses

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Cardoso
Keyword(s):  
Structural Analysis ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Theoretical Point ◽  
Prepositional Phrases ◽  
European Portuguese ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives ◽  
Definiteness Effect

Chapter 3 deals with the extraposition of restrictive relative clauses. It demonstrates that different languages and different stages of the same language may differ with respect to the three main properties of extraposition: definiteness effect; extraposition from pre-verbal positions; and extraposition from prepositional phrases. The main descriptive findings are: (1) that earlier stages of Portuguese contrast sharply with Contemporary European Portuguese with respect to the extraposition of restrictive relative clauses; and (2) the extraposition of restrictive relatives in earlier stages of Portuguese is, to a large extent, Germanic-like, unlike Contemporary European Portuguese. From a theoretical point of view, it is argued that the same structural analysis cannot alone derive the contrasting properties of restrictive relative clause extraposition. To account for the variation found in the diachronic and cross-linguistic dimensions, it is claimed that the extraposition of restrictive relatives might involve two different structures: specifying coordination plus ellipsis and VP-internal stranding.

scholarly journals Non-restrictive relative clauses in Construction Based HPSG

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doug Arnold
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives ◽  
Theoretical Apparatus ◽  
Significant Point

This paper presents an account of English non-restrictive (ˋappositive') relative clauses (NRCs) in the framework of ˋconstruction based' HPSG. Specifically, it shows how the account of restrictive relative clause constructions presented in Sag (1997) can be extended to provide an account of the syntax and semantics of NRCs and of the main differences between NRCs and restrictive relatives. The analysis reconciles the semantic intuition that NRCs behave like independent clauses with their subordinate syntax. A significant point is that, in contrast with many other approaches, it employs only existing, independently motivated theoretical apparatus, and requires absolutely no new structures, features, or types.

Non-restrictive relatives are not orphans

2007 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOUG ARNOLD
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Syntactic Representation ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives

According to a ‘radical orphanage’ approach, non-restrictive relative clauses are not part of the syntactic representation of the sentence that contains them. It is an appealing view, and seems to capture some important properties of non-restrictive relative clauses. Focusing mainly on empirical shortcomings, this paper aims to show that the appeal of such approaches is illusory. It also outlines an empirically superior ‘syntactically integrated’ account.

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 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 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.

scholarly journals Papers from the workshop on Bantu relative clauses

2010 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 261
Author(s):  
Laura Downing ◽  
Annie Rialland ◽  
Jean-Marc Beltzung ◽  
Sophie Manus ◽  
Cédric Patin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
The Other ◽  
Bantu Languages ◽  
Bantu Language ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Western Uganda ◽  
Restrictive Relatives

All of the papers in the volume except one (Kaji) take up some aspect of relative clause construction in some Bantu language. Kaji’s paper aims to account for how Tooro (J12; western Uganda) lost phonological tone through a comparative study of the tone systems of other western Uganda Bantu languages. The other papers examine a range of ways of forming relative clauses, often including non-restrictive relatives and clefts, in a wide range of languages representing a variety of prosodic systems.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document