Re: Relative clauses

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 14:26:32 +0200, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
wrote:
>
>Hi!
>
>I have a question: are there natlangs where in a relative
>construction, the modified noun is part of the subordinate clause?  I
>mean, it belongs to the matrix clause logically, of course, since the
>relative clause modifies it there.  But do some languages re-structure
>this syntactically so that the modified noun becomes part of the
>relative clause?
I think you're talking about *internally headed* relative clauses, which are
used in LAadan, which means that some natlang does it the same way. Joseph
B. or [I forgot who else here knows LAadan] could probably chime in.

>Example:
>
>Matrix Clause:
>    The man is tall.
>
>Relative clause:
>    who is eating
>
>Together:
>    The man who is eating is tall.
>            \_R_________/
>    \_M______            _______/
>        ^
>        \_ modified noun
>
>  M = Matrix clause
>  R = Relative claue
>
>But it may equally be possible to express this as:
>
>    The man is eating, X is tall.
>    \_R_____________/
>  \_                  _M________/
>        ^
>        \_ modified noun
>
>Where X is some kind of 'reverse' relative pronoun that is used in the
>matrix clause to 'import' the modified noun from the relative clause.
>(This is just an example, I can think of other possibilities to move
>the noun from matrix to relative clause.)
X is a *resumptive* pronoun; this is used in AAVE (a natlang).

Jeff

>I think in all natlangs I know, the modified noun is part of the
>matrix clause.  Is there a theoretical reason for it?
>
>Bye,
>  Henrik
>=========================================================================