Relative Clauses

1
Relative Clauses

• Advanced Syntax
• BBN ANG 253

2
Relative Clause defined

• A relative clause is a clause which is used as a
  modifier typically a noun modifier
• The man who you met
• The letter that I posted
• He is tall, which is unusual in his family

3
Types of relative clauses

• It is traditional to distinguish between
  restrictive (defining) and non-restrictive
  (non-defining) relatives
• The man who you met (as opposed to all the
  others)
• The earth, which orbits the sun (as opposed to
  all the others!)
• We can also distinguish between restrictive and
  headless relatives
• The one who gets the most points wins
• whoever gets the most points wins

4
Properties of All Relatives

• All relative clauses contain a gap
• The man you met
• the man you met Bill
• My mother, who you met last year
• my mother, who you met Bill last year
• whoever you speak to always be polite
• whoever you speak to Bill always be polite
• It seems that this is required for a clause to be
  used as a modifier.

5
Restrictive Relatives

• Begin with a wh-phrase, a complementiser or
  neither
• The man who you spoke to -- wh-relative
• The man that you spoke to -- that relative
• The man you spoke to -- zero relative
• CP CP CPwh C
  C C C IP
  C IP C IP e
  that e

6

• In standard English, the zero relative is only
  possible if the gap is not in subject position
• The man who -- spoke to you
• The man that -- spoke to you
• The man -- spoke to you
• Restrictive relatives cannot modify pronouns
• I saw him that you met

7
Non-restrictive Relatives

• Always begin with a wh-phrase
• My mother, who you met
• My mother, that you met
• My mother, you met
• Typically have a pause between the noun and the
  relative clause
• They can modify pronouns,
• I met him, who I was telling you about

8
Headless Relatives

• Always start with a wh-phrase
• What you say is interesting
• that you say is interesting
• you say is interesting
• Can have wh-ever unlike other relatives
• Whatever he says will be a lie
• The man whoever I met

9
The External Syntax of Relatives

• Relative clauses which modify nouns are
  presumably adjoined within the DP but where?
• DP DD
  NP Relative Clause N
  N

10
The distribution of restrictive relatives

• Restrictive relatives are in the scope of
  adjectives
• His stupid plan that wont work and suggestion
  that we put it into action tomorrow(both the
  plan that wont work and the suggestion that we
  put it into action tomorrow are stupid)
• Adjectives are adjoined to N, so the relative
  clause must be able to be beneath this

11

• DP D D
  NP relative adjoined to Nhis
  N AP N stupid
  N CP N
  that wont work plan

12

• This explains why restrictive relatives cannot
  appear with pronouns, which dont have NP
  complements
• DP D CP D ? that I methim

13
The distribution of non-restrictive relatives

• Non-restrictive relatives do not seem to be part
  of the NP
• Of all the ideas that you have, we like this one
  the best
• one idea that you have
• one is a pro-NP
• His father, who is a lawyer is richer than her
  one
• This suggests that it is adjoined to the D

14

• DPDP Dhis D
  CP D NP who is a
  lawyer e father

15

• This accounts for why the non-restrictive
  relative can modify a pronoun
• DP D D
  CP D who should not be
  named he

16
The distribution of headless relatives

• Headless relatives appear to be clauses which
  refer to individuals
• They can appear in DP positions
• All his arguments were flawed
• Whatever he said was flawed
• They dismissed all his arguments
• They dismissed whatever he said
• I disagreed with all his arguments
• I disagreed with whatever he said

17

• Clauses cannot go in all these positions
• That he was wrong was obvious
• We knew that he was wrong
• we argued about that he was wrong
• Thus headless relatives are more like DPs than
  CPs
• One possibility is that they are like other
  relatives, but the noun and determiner are
  phonologically empty

18

• DP DD NPe N
  N CP N what he said e

19
The internal syntax of relative clauses

• Wh-relative clauses are very much like
  wh-interrogatives
• I asked who1 you met t1
• The man who you met
• The gap in the relative clause corresponds to the
  trace in the interrogative
• This suggests that relative clauses involve a
  similar movement

20

• CP C C
  IP e DP I
  you I vP
  may meet who

21
That and zero relatives

• Not all relatives involve wh-phrases, so it seems
  that they do not involve wh-movement
• The play that he wrote
• The time we met
• But as we have seen, all relatives involve a gap
  and the gap in wh-relatives is the trace left
  behind by wh-movement.
• How is the gap formed if there is no movement in
  other relatives?

22
Evidence for wh-movement in all relatives

• Wh-movement is blocked by other wh-elements
• he asked when you met him
• Who1 did he think you met t1
• who1 did he ask when you met t1
• This is also the case in wh-relatives
• The man who1 he thinks you met t1
• The man who1 he asked when you met t1
• But it is also the case in all other relatives
• The man (that) he thinks you met
• the man (that) he asked when you met

23
All relatives involve wh-movement

• The difference between relatives is whether the
  wh-phrase is overt or covert the covert
  wh-phrase is usually called Op
• The man who you met
• The man Op (that) you met
• We can classify relative clauses in terms of
  which elements are overt or covert

24
Overt wh-phrase Covert wh-phrase (Op)
Overt complementiser That relative
Covert complementiser Wh-relative Zero relative

• There is no relative which has an overt
  complementiser and an overt wh-phrase
• the man who1 that you met t1
• The same is also not possible with interrogatives
  either
• I asked if you met him
• I asked who you met
• I asked who if you met
• It seems that in the CP an overt wh-phrase and an
  overt complementiser cannot co-occur
• We dont fully understand why

25
Why is there wh-movement in relatives?

• In interrogatives, the wh-movement has something
  to do with the interrogative nature of the clause
• But relative clauses are not interrogative
• Whithout wh-movement, a clause cannot be
  interpreted as a modifier
• The man who1/Op1 I saw t1
• The man I saw Bill

26

• The gap (trace) plays a part in the
  interpretation of the clause
• The clause is interpreted as though the modified
  noun occupied the position of the gap
• The man who I met I met the man
• The man who met me the man met me
• The man who I spoke to I spoke to the man
• So in order to interpret a clause as a modifier,
  we need to interpret the modified noun with
  respect to a function inside the clause
• This is what the wh-movement achieves

27

• reference
• The man who1 I know t1
• movement

28
The internal syntax of headless relatives

• Headless relatives always involve overt
  wh-phrases, but their interpretation is more like
  a restrictive relative
• Dont trust anyone that you meet
• Dont trust e whoever you meet
• The overt status of the wh-element is probably
  due to the covert status of the noun modified
• The covert operators need overt antecedents
• This is why we do not get a covert operator in
  wh-interrogatives
• I asked Op1 you like t1

29

• Headless relatives are the only ones that allow
  the wh-ever wh-element
• Whoever dares wins
• The one who dares wins
• the one whoever dares wins
• Thus, ever is in complementary distribution
  with overt nouns and determiners, suggesting that
  it is one of these
• The wh-element seems to move to attach to the
  ever element
• DP ever CP who1 you meet t1
• DP who1-ever CP t1 you meet t1