Transcript Relative Clauses - eesl542dwinter2012

Anna Hefley
Ghadah Althunayyan
HyunMi Lee
Chapter 18
MAIN/ INDEPENDENT
CLAUSE
SUBORDINATE/ DEPENDENT
CLAUSE
E.g. My father is a man who lifts weights.



One kind of dependent
clauses.
Modify noun phrases.
Introduced by relative
pronouns:
that, which, who,
whom, whose

Add information to the
head nouns of noun
phrases (NP).
I like people who have a good sense of humor.
Please, describe yourself
using this format of the
sentence:
I am a person who …
E.g. I am a person who
likes reading poetry.
Relative clauses have the same functions as adjectives, called
also adjective clauses.

adjectives + head nouns (i.e. prenominal modifiers)
Art
Adj
Adj
Head Noun
a difficult and perplexing problem

head nouns + relative clause (i.e. postnominal modifiers)
Art
a
Head Noun
problem
Relative Clause
that is difficult and perplexing.
NP modified can have any grammatical function in the
sentence; it can be a subject, object, indirect object, or object
of a preposition.
A problem that is difficult and perplexing can take time to
solve.
The relative clause modifies a NP that is a subject of the main clause.
We gave him a problem that is difficult and perplexing.
The relative clause modifies a NP that is a object of the main clause.
RESTRICTIVE RELATIVE
CLAUSE
My sister who lives in
Canada is a biologist.
The restrictive relative clause
who lives in Canada restricts
my sister by specifying the
sister in Canada.
The sentence implies that the
speaker has more than one
sister, but only one in Canada
is a biologist. The information
added by the relative clause
identifies the sister.
NONRESTRICTIVE RELATIVE
CLAUSE
My sister, who lives in
Canada, is a biologist.
The nonrestrictive clause who
lives in Canada does not restricts
my sister. It only adds
information about the noun
modified.
There is no implication that the
speaker has other sisters.
The commas around nonrestrictive relatives reflect the pauses in speech
and falling intonation pattern at the end of the clause. There is no pause at
the beginning or end of a restrictive relative clause, and falling intonation
occurs only at the end of the sentence.
These two criteria - punctuation in written sentences and intonation in
spoken sentences - are traditionally applied to distinguish restrictive from
nonrestrictive relative clauses.
The formation of relative clauses can be described by means of
a rule wh- movement, which moves the NP in the relative
clause that corresponds to the NP in the main clause to the
front of the relative clause, leaving a “gap” at the place from
which it was moved. The NP fronted by wh-movement is
replaced by a relative pronoun. The NP functions as an object
NP.
When the NP is the subject
of relative clause, whmovement does not apply,
but the subject NP is
replaced by a relative
pronoun.
The car [the car crashed into the streetlight] was destroyed.
that
If the NP being replaced is human (or, for
example, a pet), that or who (and whom, if the
NP is an object) can be used. This is despite
the prescriptivist rule that only who should be
used for human NPs. Who occurs more
frequently in writing, but that is used almost
as frequently as who in spoken English. With
other NPs, that or which can be used. Whose,
which expresses possession, is used for all NPs
but is preferred for those that are human. With
the exception of that, all the relative pronouns
can be used in restrictive or nonrestrictive
relative clauses; that can only be used in
restrictive relative clauses.
Classification based on the grammatical function of their
relative pronouns.
①
②
③
④
⑤
⑥
Subject (S)
Direct Object (O)
Indirect object (IO)
Object of the preposition (OP)
Possessive (POS)
Object of comparison (OC)



Relative pronoun replaces the subject of the clause.
Does not require wh-movement
Relative pronouns who and that replace human NPs
The guy [who hired Robert] was a manager of the store.
The guy [that hired Robert] was a manager of the store.

The relative pronouns which and that replace inanimate NPs
The tornado [that/which struck the town] destroyed several homes.

That seems to be preferred, at least for American English (AE).


The relative pronoun replaces the object of the verb.
The relative pronouns who, whom, and that introduce O
relative clauses that modify human nouns.
At the party there were many people [who he did not know].
At the party there were many people [that he did not know].

In spoken English, the relative pronoun used is generally,
who or that.
As early as 1928, the Oxford English Dictionary
observed that whom was “no longer in natural
colloquial speech” as relative pronoun
introducing O relatives. Today, whom, tends
to be used mostly in written English.
At the party there were many people [whom he did not know].

Relative pronoun comes
from the indirect position
following the preposition to
or for.

As with Object Relative
clauses, which, who and
whom are all used. However,
2 patterns are possible.
In the first pattern, when wh-movement occurs, the
preposition to or for remains behind. Whom is seldom used in
this pattern.
In the other pattern, the preposition, too, is moved to the front
of the clause. Only whom and which can occur in this pattern;
who and that are not possible.

Relative clauses with to whom / for
whom sound formal to NSs; hence
they tend to be confined to written
English.

Instead, in spoken English speakers
use the relative clause pattern with
clause-final prepositions.
The store for which she bakes her cakes
is located nearby.

They have the same two patterns as Indirect Object (IO)
relatives.

The difference: Indirect Object (IO) relatives are limited to
two prepositions, to and for, in as much as the indirect object
is always a goal or beneficiary, whereas with Object of the
Preposition relatives many prepositions can occur.

As with Indirect Object (IO) relative clauses, the first OP
pattern, has the preposition stranded at the end of the clause.
This is more typical of spoken English.
The mattress [which/that he slept on] had several broken springs.
The people [who/that he aimed his weapon at] were frightened.

The second pattern is found more often in written English.
The mattress [on which he slept] had several broken springs.
The people [at whom he aimed his weapon] were frightened.

When way or manner is the object of the preposition in, the
preposition must be moved and cannot be stranded.
The manner in which he spoke was shocking.
*The manner which he spoke in was shocking.

Most phrasal prepositional verbs do not permit the elements
following the verb to be moved.
A preposition is an abomination which we will not put up with.
*A preposition is an abomination up with which we will not put.

The relative pronoun replaces an element that expresses
possession.

The relative pronoun may be whose or which preceded by
of.

The relative pronoun whose is
typically used when the head noun is
human or animate.
Last week I met a girl [whose brother
works in your law firm].

Or is collective noun such as a club,
agency, corporation, or society.
He bought sock in a company [whose
profits had increased last quarter].
The relative pronoun whose can be also used with inanimate
head nouns.
A crystal is a piece of matter
[whose boundaries are naturally
formed plane surfaces].
Let ABC be a triangle
[whose sides are of equal length].


Possessive relative pronouns are part of a NP. Whose functions
as a possessive determiner, such as my, your, our, and so on.
If the relevant NP is in subject position, whose replaces its
determiner.
I just met that girl [[ that girl’s brother] is a chef].
I just met that girl [[ whose brother] is a chef].

If the NP is elsewhere in the clause, wh-movement is needed
to produce a sentence.
The author [whose last three books Peter reviewed] won a
Pulitzer Prize.
The constituents before the noun may include not only the words
that are replaced by whose but also, for example, a quantifier,
such as several + the preposition of, and these too, are moved to
the front of the clause.
The author several of whose books Peter reviewed won a Pulitzer.
In these types of sentences:
The author several of whose books Peter reviewed won a Pulitzer.
The author [whose last three books Peter reviewed] won a Pulitzer
Prize.
there is a strong tendency to add pauses around the center –embedded
relative clause and give it the falling intonation typical of a
nonrestrictive relative clause. It may be difficult to determine whether
the speaker had a restrictive or nonrestrictive relative clause in mind.
As we remember, there are two ways to indicate possession with nouns:
the reports’ size – is a source of the relative pronoun whose
the size of the reports – is the source of which
The reports [whose size the government prescribes] are boring.
The reports [the size of which the government prescribes] are boring.
Following wh-movement, three other combinations are correct as well.
The reports [which the government prescribes the size of] are boring.
The reports of which the government prescribes the size] are boring.

The relative pronouns used are who, whom, and that for NPs
referring to humans.
The girl [who/that Susan was faster than] won the race.

The relative pronouns used are which and that for NPs referring to
inanimate things.
The sports car [which/that the Alfa Romeo was faster than] was a
Porsche.
The conjunction than cannot move to the front of the clause!
What as a Relative Pronoun in Nonstandard
English, is an alternative to which and that.
What is more common in BE than AE, and it
is used in both subject (S) and object (O)
relative clauses.
In spoken English:
And you see that truck what just went by.
That geezer what we met down at the bar
is me old Dad.
In spoken English NSs sometimes produce relative clauses that
contain a resumptive pronoun.
e.g. (36)
*Usually they give you a thing …, you know, a thing that you don’t want it.
Object (O) Relative
Clauses
QUESTION
Object (O) Relative
Clauses
ANSWERS
Anna Hefley
Ghadah Althunayyan
HyunMi Lee
Chapter 18
ETRAPOSED RELATIVE CLAUSES
 Sometimes it appears directly after the head
noun they modify. Occasionally, a writer or a
speaker may place them further away.
a.
A man who has red hair just came in.
b.
A man _____________ just came in who has
red hair.

Relative clauses that have been moved away
from the head nouns they modify, are called
extraposed relatives.
Often, the relative clause is separated from its NP by a single
word, for example, by an adverb such as yesterday as in (1),
or a main verb such as happened as in (2).
(1) a. I saw someone who I hadn't seen for years yesterday.
b. I saw someone yesterday who I hadn't seen for years.
(2) a. Something that I can't really talk about happened.
b. Something happened that I can't really talk about.
However, the separation can be longer. The
relative clause can be moved away from the
subject noun around a verb phrase,
containing not only a verb but also a
prepositional phrase.
a.
A girl who has an IQ of 200 is studying with
me.
b.
A girl is studying with me who has an IQ of
200.
There is one restriction that cannot be violated: a relative
clause cannot be moved into a position in which it could have
originated, that is, following another noun. This restriction
exists because such a move could change the meaning of the
original sentence.
a.
A pole that must have been nine feet tall fell on a workman.
b.
A pole fell on a workman that must have been nine feet tall.
Relative clauses are frequently strung together, on clause after
the other. It occurs more frequently in conversation than in
writing.
a.
The people [who take the course] [who Dana likes] usually
come from local high schools.
b.
The book [that I like] [which everyone else in the class hates]
was written by Joan.
Notice that stacking relative clauses modifies the same noun,
people in (a) and book in (b). There is no limit to the number of
relative clauses that could be linked in this way. In general native
speakers do not stack more than two relatives.
In all types of clauses, except S relative clauses, it is possible to delete
the relative pronoun, with the relative clause thus beginning with the
subject NP. Such clauses are sometimes said to have a "zero relative
pronoun.”
Deletion of the relative pronoun is possible in Object (O) relative
clause:
(1) a. We just met that woman [who/whom/that Alan likes so much].
b. We just met that woman [Alan likes so much].
(2) a. We just met that woman [who/that likes Alan so much].
b. *We just met that woman [likes Alan so much].

Deletion is also possible in Object of
Comparison (OC) relative clause:
a.
The sports car which/that the Alfa
Romeo was faster than won the Le
Mans 24-hours race.
b.
The sports car the Alfa Romeo was
faster than won the Le Mans 24hours race.

In Indirect Object (IO) and Object of the Proposition (OP) relatives,
reduction can occur only in the patterns that have the proposition
standard at the end of the clause. (1) and (2) are IO relatives.
(1) a. The student who the dean sent a message to is out of town.
b. The student the dean sent a message to is out of town.
(2) a. The student to whom the dean send a message is out of town.
b. * The student to the dean send a message to is out of town.

Similarly, of which Possessive (POS) relatives with stranded
preposition can be reduced.
a.
The reports which the government prescribes the size of are
boring.
b.
The reports the government prescribes the size of are boring.
However, POS relatives introduced by whose cannot be reduced :
a.
Last week I met a girl whose brother works in your law firm.
b. *Last week I met a girl brother works in your law firm.
http://www.usingenglish.com/quizzes/509.html
Although we have previously seen that the
relative pronoun cannot be omitted in S
relatives, in certain S relatives, it appears that
the relative pronoun can be omitted if an
additional change is made .
REDUCTION IN CLAUSE with Be
In S relative clauses, the relative pronoun and a form of be may be
deleted when they are followed by:

A present participle
a.
That man who is standing over there knows the Prime Minister.
b.
That man standing over there knows the Prime Minister.

A past participle in a passive sentence
a.
The bills that were passed by the House yesterday died in the Senate.
b.
The bills passed by the House yesterday died in the Senate.
REDUCTION IN CLAUSE with Be

An adjective followed by a prepositional phrase as in (1),
including past participle adjectives as in (2).
(1) a. Senators who are familiar with details of the proposal believe
that it has a good chance of passing.
b. Senators familiar with details of the proposal believe that it has
a good chance of passing.
(2) a. He is considered to be a prophet who is descended from heaven.
b. He is considered to be a prophet descended from heaven.

Postnominal modifiers with stative verbs in present participle form
might be a special type of reduced relative clause.
A woman resembling your wife is sitting in front of me.
This sentence has the same meaning as:
A woman who resembles your wife is sitting in front of me.
It is not a reduced version of the ungrammatical sentence:
* A woman who is resembling your wife is sitting in front of me.
Omission or
Reduction
QUESTION
Omission or
Reduction
ANSWERS