The puzzling nuanced status of who free relative clauses in English: a follow-up to Patterson and Caponigro (2015)

This squib challenges Patterson & Caponigro's (2015, this journal) claim that there are few acceptable free relative clauses with who. We show that free relatives with who are generally acceptable when they are ‘transparent’ free relatives or complements of a copula, and add further nuance to their findings concerning how the degree of acceptability of free relatives with who varies according to positional factors.

Headless Relative Clauses in Sierra Popoluca

This chapter presents the first investigation of headless relative clauses in Sierra Popoluca, a Mixe-Zoquean language spoken in the southern part of the state of Veracruz, Mexico. It shows that Sierra Popoluca exhibits a very productive system of headless relative clauses. The language has free relative clauses of all three major types attested crosslinguistically and, remarkably, all three types can be introduced by almost all the wh-words that can occur in wh- interrogative clauses. It also has two types of light-headed relative clauses, both with demonstrative pronouns as their “light heads”: those which are introduced by a relative subordinator and those that are introduced by wh-words—the same two strategies attested in headed relative clauses in Sierra Popoluca. Finally, the language has one more variety of headless relative clause that lacks both a light head and a wh-word.

Headless Relative Clauses in Southeastern Tepehuan (O'dam)

Varieties of headless relative clauses in the Uto-Aztecan language Southeastern Tepehuan (O’dam) are discussed, together with two related constructions: wh- interrogative clauses and headed relative clauses. O’dam encodes relative clauses using two strategies: nominalization and finite clause formation. Unlike most of the Uto-Aztecan family, O’dam uses the nominalization strategy only in ritual speech. Elsewhere, the language uses the general subordinator particle na to introduce all types of embedded clauses: adverbial, completive, and relative. This mode of subordination is typologically interesting for the Uto-Aztecan family because it results in an innovative strategy: finite clauses instead of nominalization. O’dam distinguishes between headed and headless relative clauses. Unlike headed relative clauses, headless relative clauses in O’dam lack a nominal head and require a wh-word. Two main varieties are attested: free relative clauses (maximal and existential, but not free choice) and light-headed relative clauses.

Headless Relative Clauses in K'iche'

This chapter offers a preliminary description of headless relative clauses in K’iche’. The language exhibits all three varieties of free relative clauses that are attested crosslinguistically: maximal, existential, and free-choice. It also has two other kinds of headless relative clauses: light-headed relative clauses introduced by determiners (without wh-expressions) and headless relative clauses with no marking of any kind (neither wh-expressions nor determiners). Overall, the picture that emerges is that all three varieties of free relative clauses exhibit clear morpho-syntactic and semantic differences that differentiate them both from each other as well as from headed relative clauses. One characteristic that helps to differentiate between them is the different subsets of wh-expressions they make use of. All of these wh- clausal constructions are related but, crucially, independent. Of the two kinds of headless relative clauses that do not make use of wh-expressions, one kind—light-headed relative clauses—is introduced by a determiner, while the other kind has no special marking. Both exhibit distributional and semantic restrictions that distinguish them from headed relative clauses.

Headless Relative Clauses in Q'anjob'al

This chapter presents the first ever description and analysis of headless relative constructions in Q’anjob’al, a Mayan language spoken in Guatemala. It focuses on headless relative clauses (which lack a nominal head, regardless of other material in the head domain) and briefly touches on headed relative clauses. Headless relative clauses are productive in Q’anjob’al. The language distinguishes three kinds of free relative clauses (maximal, existential, and free choice) and three other kinds of headless relative clauses: non-free headless relative clauses headed by pronouns, determiners, or nothing at all. All free relative clauses have the same morpho-syntax, but non-free headless relative clauses differ morpho-syntactically from them and from each other. Wh- interrogative clauses are compared to relative constructions due to their similarities. Relative constructions with a pronominal head are argued to be neither light-headed relative clauses nor any other kind of headless relative clause.

Headless Relative Clauses in Chuj

This chapter explores various types of headless relative clause constructions in Chuj, a Mayan language spoken in Huehuetenango, Guatemala, and Chiapas, Mexico by 45,000 to 70,000 speakers. The main focus is free relative clauses, of which Chuj features three kinds: maximal free relative clauses, existential free relative clauses, and free-choice free relative clauses. Following earlier work on other languages, maximal free relative clauses and existential free relative clauses are argued to be structurally identical at their core; the difference in their interpretations is a consequence of a difference in the elements that each kind combines with. Chuj is also shown to feature a rich inventory of other types of headless relative clauses. These include headless relative clauses introduced by both a wh-word and a determiner [+WH, +DET], those introduced only by a determiner [−WH, +DET], and those that are formed with neither a wh-word nor a determiner [−WH, −DET].

Headless Relative Clauses in Tlaxcala Náhuatl

This chapter describes the basic structural, morpho-syntactic, and semantic characteristics of headless relative clauses in the variety of Náhuatl spoken in Tlaxcala. It shows that the language has free relative clauses, i.e. headless relative clauses introduced by wh-expressions. In particular, it has all three main varieties that have been attested crosslinguistically: maximal free relative clauses, existential free relative clauses, and free-choice free relative clauses. Other types of headless relative clauses are attested as well, including light-headed relative clauses, i.e. relative clauses that, rather than a full nominal head, only have a determiner-like element as their head.

Headless Relative Clauses in San Pedro Mixtepec Zapotec

Headless relative clauses are investigated in the Zapotec variety spoken in San Pedro Mixtepec, Oaxaca, Mexico. Two related constructions are briefly introduced as well: wh- interrogative clauses and headed relative clauses. San Pedro Mixtepec Zapotec is shown to possess the three main kinds of free relative clauses that are attested crosslinguistically, each of which is distinguished by syntactic, morphological, and semantic properties: maximal, existential, and free-choice free relative clauses. The language also has two other kinds of headless relative clauses: light-headed relative clauses introduced by pronominals, and headless relative clauses introduced by relative pronouns.

Headless Relative Clauses in Ch'ol

This chapter surveys headless relative clauses in Ch’ol, a Mayan language spoken in the state of Chiapas in southern Mexico. Ch’ol is rare among Mayan languages in possessing a special morpheme found with relativized nouns, the second position clitic = bä. While this morpheme is required for relativized argument nouns, it is not present in free relatives, which suggests a different derivation for this class of construction. Maximal (definite) and existential (indefinite) free relatives are described. They both make use of a fronted wh-expression and lack the morpheme = bä. Maximal and existential free relatives in Ch’ol appear identical to one another in structure. Following existing studies on other languages, it is argued that the different interpretations of these clauses are a result of the environments in which they appear. Finally, Ch’ol has two different types of constructions in which a determiner element is followed by a headless relative: one corresponding to the = bä structure and one corresponding to the free relative structure. The former is proposed to be a regular headed relative clause with an unpronounced head, as has elsewhere been argued for Yucatec. The latter, on the other hand, corresponds to a free relative structure with an added determiner element.

Headless Relative Clauses in Yucatec Maya

This chapter surveys headless relative clauses (i.e. ones with no overt head noun) in Yucatec Maya, an indigenous language of southern Mexico. For Indo-European languages, discussion of such constructions has focused on “free relative clauses”—those with only a bare wh-word in place of a head—and to a lesser extent, “light-headed” relative clauses⎯those with a dedicated set of pronominal elements in place of a head noun. In contrast, Yucatec Maya is shown to allow for four different kinds of surface headless relative clause forms depending on the presence or absence of a wh-word and the presence or absence of a determiner, quantifier, or other D-element. With respect to free relative clauses, whereas many more well-studied Indo-European languages have morpho-syntactically distinct constructions for definite and indefinite free relative clauses (e.g. with an infinitive or subjunctive form in the latter case), Yucatec Maya is shown to have a single morpho-syntactic form whose (in)definiteness is determined by syntactic context.