The Prenominal Origin of Relative Clauses

THE PRENOMINAL ORIGIN OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

Guglielmo Cinque - University of Venice ()

Department of Linguistics, University of Hong Kong - May 5, 2009

I. Introduction.

(1)a The [ book[RC that we read ]] English (externally headed postnominal)

b [[RCnuna ranti-shqa-n] bestya].. Quechua (Cole 1987,279)(externally headed prenominal)

man buy-PERF-3 horse.NOM..

‘the horse the man bought..’

c[[RC nuna bestya-ta ranti-shqa-n]] (alli bestya-m)Quechua (Cole 1987,279) (internallyheaded)

man horse.ACC buy-PERF-3 good horse..

‘the horse the man bought (was a good horse)’

d [RC what you did ] (is nice) English (‘headless’, or free)

e [RCjo laRkii khaRii hai] vo laRkii lambii hai Hindi (Dayal 1996) (correlative)

which girl standing is that girl tall is

‘The girl who is standing is tall’

(2) [DP the [CP book [C’ that [IP we read t ]]]](Kayne 1994)

II. A left-right asymmetry.

(3) Greenberg’s (1963) Universal 20: “When any or all of the items (demonstrative, numeral, and descriptive adjective) precede the noun, they are always found in that order. If they follow, the order is either the same or its exact opposite.”

5BOrder of demonstratives, numerals, and adjectives (Greenberg 1963,Hawkins 1983,Cinque2005a)

(4)a Dem > Num > A > N Chinese, English, Georgian, Nama, Ket,Lezgian, Turkish,…

b *A > Num > Dem > N 0

c N> Dem > Num > A Kikuyu, Turkana, Rendille, Nkore-Kiga, Noni, Abu‘, Arbore…

d N > A > Num > Dem Amele, Gungbe, Igbo, Mao Naga, Swahili, Yoruba, Selepet,…

Order of (attributive) adjectives: (Hetzron 1978; Sproat and Shih 1991; Cinque 1994, Scott 2002)

(5)a Asize > Acolor > Anationality > N (English, Bulgarian…)

b * Anationality > Acolor > AsizeN 0

c N > Asize > Acolor > Anationality (Welsh, Irish, Maltese…)F[1]

d N > Anationality > Acolor > Asize (Indonesian,Yoruba,…)

Order of adverbs: (Cinque 1999,42f, Pearson 2000, Rakowski and Travis 2000)

(6)a Advno longer > Advalways > AdvcompletelyV (English, Chinese,…)

b * Advcompletely > Advalways > Advno longerV 0

c V > Advno longer > Advalways > Advcompletely((main clause) German, Italian…)

d V > Advcompletely > Advalways > Advno longer(Malagasy, Niuean,…)

Order of circumstantial PPs (Boisson 1981, Cinque 2002, Hinterhölzl 2002, Schweikert 2005)

(7)aTemp > Loc > Manner V (Turkish, Nambikuara,.. - Kornfilt p.c., Kroeker (2001,3))

0Bb *Manner > Loc > Temp > V 0

cV > Temp > Loc > Manner (V/2 clause German,..)

1Bd V > Manner > Loc > Temp (Italian, Norwegian,..)

Order of (speech act) Mood, Tense, and Aspect morphemes (Cinque to appear)

(8)aMood Tense Aspect V (Nama, Yoruba,…)

b*Aspect Tense Mood V 0

cV Mood Tense Aspect(Comox,..)

d V Aspect Tense Mood(Korean, Malayalam,…)

(9) [DP…[YP RC [YP Y [… [NPN ]]]]]

6BIII. The structural location of RCs in the DP (a brief cross-linguistic look)

7B(10) Dem RC Num A N :

North Caucasian:Archi, (Testelec 1998,277), Ingush (Rijkhoff 2002,310)

Dravidian:Malayalam (Jayaseelan, p.c.), Telugu (Jayaseelan, p.c.)

Cushitic: Wolaytta (Lamberti and Sottile 1997,215)

Tibeto-Burman:Chantyal (Noonan 2003,329), Kham (Watters 2002,195)

2B(11)aMalayalam (Dravidian - K.A. Jayaseelan, p.c.)

aa [nammaL kaND-a] muunn kaRutta naay-kkaL

those [ we saw-Rel ] three black dog-PL

‘those three black dogs that we saw’

b Wolaytta (West Cushitic – Lamberti and Sottile 1997,215)

he [taa-w kuttuwa ehida] iccashu adussa laagge-t-I

those me-to chicken having-brought five tall friend-pl.-subj.

‘those five tall friends who brought me a chicken’

(12) N A Num RC Dem

Amazonian:Canela-Krahô (Popjes and Popjes 1986)

Austronesian:Buginese (Simpson 2001,13), Ponapean (Rehg 1981,124), Tetun Dili (van Engelenhoven and Williams-van Klinken 2005,758). Tobati (Donohue 2002,193)

Mon-Khmer:Kammu (or Khmu’) (Svantesson 1986,49)

Niger-Congo:Gungbe (Aboh, p.c.), Lango (Noonan 1992,156), Yoruba (O. Ajiboye p.c.)

Paman:Kugu Nganhcara(Smith and Johnson 2000,430)

Papuan:One (Donohue 2000,9)

Semitic:Sudanese Arabic (Hatim Abbas Hassan, p.c.)

Tai-Kadai:Thai (Den Dikken and Singhapreecha 2004)

(13)aLango (Niger-Congo - Noonan 1992, 156)

gwóggî à dÒŋò àryÓ [ámê lócə ònèkò]-nì

dogs ATT big two [Rel-Part man 3sg.kill.Perf]-this

‘These two big dogs that the man killed’

b Ponapean (Austronesian - Rehg 1981,124)

pwutak reirei silimen [me lalaid]-o

boy tall three [who are.fishing]-that

‘those three tall boys who are fishing’

(14) [DemP D° [RC X° [NumP Y° [AP Z° [NP]]]]]

(15)a RC Dem Num A N (alternative orders in Chinese, Japanese, Malayalam, etc.)

b N A Num Dem RC (Lewo (Austronesian), Vitu (Papuan), etc.)

(16) RC Dem t Num A N

(17) Dem Num RC A N Karata(Testelec 1998,277), Chinese (one order) (Lu 1990,4,20)

(18) Karata (North Caucasian – cf. Testelec 1998,277)

hab k’eda [dena raxw-araj] č’ikororaj igruška-bdi…

this two I bring-PRT nice toy-PL

‘these two nice toys which I had brought…’

(19) “In Dutch (as well as e.g. in German and Frisian) the preposed participial construction follows the demonstrative and the numeral” (Rijkhoff 1998,362) (and, we may add, precedes “direct modification” adjectives)

3BGerman (W. Schweikert, p.c.)

(20)a Diese drei [in ihrem Büro arbeitenden] Männer

b ??Diese [in ihrem Büro arbeitenden] drei Männer

‘these three men working in the office’

(21)a Der [kürzlich angekommene] ehemalige Botschafter von Chile

b ??Der ehemalige [kürzlich angekommene] Botschafter von Chile [non-parenthetical]

‘the recently arrived former ambassadors of Chile’

(22) N A RC Num Dem Khmer (Simpson 2005,806)

(23) RCappositive Qall Dem RCrestrictiveNum RCreduced A N 

(Cinque 2008, fn25, based on Kameshima 1989)

8BIV. The “raising” and the “matching” derivation of RCs(apparent need for both. See,among others: Carlson 1977, Heim 1987, Ǻfarli 1994, Grosu and Landmann 1998, Sauerland 1998,1999, 2003,Bhatt 2002,Aoun and Li 2003,Szczegielniak 2005, Hulsey and Sauerland 2006).

Evidence for the raising derivation (cf. (2) above).

a) RCs whose Head is an idiom chunk

(24) The headway that John made was substantial (Brame 1976,127)

(vs. *The headway that John disliked was substantial)

b) RCs whose Head receives an amount reading

(25) The pounds that Max weighs make little difference (Carlson 1977,531)

The number x such that Max weighs x-many pounds (make little difference)

c)RCs whose Head displays“Inverse (Case) Attraction”:

(26) doxtar ey ra [ke jon mišnose] inja æs (Dari (Afghan Farsi) - Houston 1974,43)

girl art acc comp John know.3 here be.3

‘the girl that John knows is here’

Evidence for the matching derivation.

a) Evidence from the non obligatory reconstruction of the Head w.r.t. Principle C

(27)a The pictures of Marsdeni which hei displays prominently are generally the attractive ones(Safir 1998, cited in Sauerland 1999,354)

vs. the obligatory reconstruction of interrogative wh-phrases and RC internal wh-phrases:

(28)a *Which pictures of Marsdeni does hei display prominently? (Sauerland 1999,354)

b *I respect any writer whose depiction of Johni hei’ll object to (Safir 1998, cited in Sauerland 1999,355)

b) Further cases of non-reconstruction of the Head:der- vs. som-relatives in Norwegian(Ǻfarli 1994); indefinite (0) vs. definite (yalli) relatives in Lebanese Arabic (Aoun and Li 2003);który/kotoryjvs. co/čtorelatives in Polish and Russian (Szczegielniak 2005); whichvs. that relatives in English (Ǻfarli 1994, Aoun and Li 2003);Finnish RCs with relative pronouns (Manninen 2003).

c) Full repetition of the Head inside the relative clause:

(29) Non hanno ancora trovato una sostanza [dalla quale sostanza ricavare un rimedio contro l’epilessia] ‘They have not found a substance from which substance to obtain a remedy against epilepsy’ (Italian - cf. Cinque 1978,88f)

(30) Loci natura erat haec quem locum nostri delegerant (Latin – Keenan 1985,153)

Of the ground nature was this which ground our (men) chose

‘The nature of the ground which our men chose was this’

(31) skə̀n[nàm dzán skə̀n syì] há diyà gáy kà (Mina (Chadic)- Frajzyngier and Johnston 2005,433)F[2]

thing [1du find thing discourse marker] 2sg put spoil pos

‘The thing we found, you are ruining it’

vs. full repetition of interrogative wh-phrases

(32)a *Quale sostanza credi quale sostanza abbiano ricavato?

b *Quale sostanza credi abbiano ricavato quale sostanza?

Which substance do you think which substance they obtained which substance?

d) Negative Polarity Licensing (Citko 2001)

(33)a I don’t think he could trust anyone

b*I don’t think everyone could trust anyone

(34) Nobody found a picture of anyone which everybody liked

Two syntactic phenomena discriminating between “raising”and “matching”.

stacking(Carlson 1977):

idiom chunk:

(35) *Jake noticed the headway we made that Fred said we couldn’t make (Carlson 1977,540)

amount:

(36) *This desk weighs every pound they said it would weigh that I had hoped it wouldn’t (weigh) (Carlson 1977,540)

inverse Case attraction:

(37) *?Zani-ro ke diruz didi ke har kasi doost dare bebine inja-st (Razieh Beyraghdar,p.c.)

(the) woman-ACC that yesterday saw-2sg. that each person pleasure has to see here-is3sg.

‘the woman that you saw yesterday that everybody would like to see is here’

extraposition (Hulsey and Sauerland 2006):

idiom chunk:

(38) *Mary praised the headway last year that John made (Hulsey and Sauerland 2006,114)

amount:

(39) *It will take us all year to drink the champagne in France that he spilled at the party (Szczegielniak 2005,71) [the asterisk refers to the amount reading]

inverse Case attraction:

(40) *doxtar ey ra inja æs [ke jon mišnose] (Dari (Afghan Farsi) - Houston 1974,43)

girl art acc here be.3 comp John know.3

‘the girl is here that John knows’

V. A (simplified) unified structure for “raising” and “matching” RCs.

(41) DP

the

(that)

IPdP1= External Head

DPNumP

John I two

V dP2= Internal Head

bought AP

NumP nice

two NP

AP NP books

nice books

(42)

the

(that)

IP dP1=External Head

DPNumP

John I two

V dP2= Internal Head

bought AP

NumP nice

two NP

AP books

nice

books

(43) DP

the

(that)

IP dP1=External Head

DPNumP

John I two

V dP2= Internal Head

bought AP

NumP nice

two NP

AP books

nice

books

VI. Potential Problems

(44) [The pictures of Marsdeni [which pictures of Marsdeni heidisplays which pictures of Marsdeni prominently] pictures of Marsdeni ] are generally the attractive ones(cf. Safir 1998)

(45) [The headwayi that [he madeheadwayi] headway] was satisfactory

(46) [The AMOUNT of headway that [he madeAMOUNT of headway] AMOUNT] was satisfactory

VII. Externally Headed Prenominal RCs:

Raising (cf. 47)): dP2 is attracted to Spec,C2, from where it controlsthe deletion of dP1; after which the remnantraises to Spec,C1.F[3]F Reconstruction effects are expected as the overt Head is the ‘internal’one (linked to the trace). And so is sensitivity to islands, due to the movementof the ‘internal’ Head.

(47) DP This case seems to be instantiated byChinese, which displays both relativization

of idiom chunks (hence reconstruction) and island sensitivity (Aoun and Li 2003,

177), and Modern Tamil, where, according to Annamalai andSteever (1998,123),

D prenominal relative clauses are sensitive to islands.F[4]F

the

IP dP1

DP book

John I

dP2

bought

book

Matching (cf. (48)): dP1 directly controls the deletion of dP2 backward. No reconstruction effects are expected, as the overt Head is the‘external’ one (the ‘internal’ Head not having moved). Nor is sensitivity to islands, as no movement of the internal Head is involved.

(48) DP This case may be instantiated by Tsez (Northeast Caucasian), which

apparently showsno island sensitivity (Comrie and Polinsky 1999).

the

IP dP1

DP book

John I

dP2 V

bought

book

VIII.Internally headed RCs(which often alternate with prenominal RCs – Cole 1987):

Matching: dP2directly controls the deletion of dP1 forward.F[5]F

(49) DP

the

IP dP1

DP book

John I

dP2

bought

book

The indefiniteness restriction of the internal Head of certain languages, which only have “matching” (Lakhota – Williamson 1987,Diegueño- Gorbet 1976, and Mojave- Munro 1976, with the same cluster of properties: indefiniteness restriction, the possibility of stacking and the absence of island sensitivity) follows from the indefinite character of the external Headand deletion in situ under strict identity of the two Heads).

Raising: in those languages that show no indefinite restrictionF[6]F (Japanese, Korean, Quechua, Navajo, and Haida, among other languages). Given their island sensitivity, it is tempting to see this second type as involving movement (differently from the first type); more specifically as involving the “raising” derivation in (50), where the internal Head, dP2, is attracted to Spec,C2, from where it controls the deletion of dP1, the external Head. After that a phrase of the Remnant must be taken to raise to Spec,C1, higher than the (strong) determiners.F[7]F In this case, reconstruction effects are expected (as the overt Head is the ‘internal’ one, linked to the trace), as is sensitivity to islands, due to the movement of the internal Head.

(50)

the

IP dP1

DP book

John I

VdP2

bought

book

IX.‘Headless’ or Free RCs

(51)a (I don’t like) [[ what THING you said] (SUCH) THING]

b (He weighs) [[ what AMOUNT you weigh] (SUCH) AMOUNT]

c (Here is) [[ where PLACE they slept] THERE PLACE]

d (I was there) [[ when TIME he said that] THEN TIME]

e(She hates[[ whoever PERSON does that ] (SUCH) PERSON]

(52) [ Mary (taku) kağe] ki] ophewatų (Lakhota – Williamson 1987)

M. (something) make the I-buy

‘I bought what Mary made’

In certain languages the “dummy” Head (thing, place, time, person, etc.) is necessarily overt (‘thing you said’ = ‘what you said’; ..): Rapanui (Austronesian)– Du Feu 1996,47; Obolo (Niger-Congo) – Faraclas 1984,45; Abun (Papuan) – Berry and Berry 1999,146ff.

X. Correlative RCs: In addition to the (possibly multiply headed)adjunct correlative, the correlative RC can be analysed as the left dislocation of either a Headless (‘Free’), or an Internally Headed, or an externally Headed,RC, matched by a resumptive DP (often pronominal/demonstrative) in the matrix clause.

In each case, it is the entire DP that is left dislocated, and resumed by a correlative DP.

See the Marathi (Indo-Aryan) paradigm in (50), from Wali (2006,289) (based in part on Junghare 1974), which points to the underlying structure in (49):

(49) [ti mulgi [ji mulgi ghari geli]] ti mulgi ithe raathe (*)

[that girl [which girl home went]] that girl here lives

‘the girl who went home lives here’

(50)a [ti mulgi [ji 0 ghari geli]]ti 0ithe raathe

b [ti 0 [ji mulgi ghari geli]] ti 0 ithe raathe

c [ti 0 [ji 0 ghari geli]]ti mulgiithe raathe

------

d [0 0 [ji mulgi ghari geli]] ti 0 ithe raathe

e [0 0 [ji 0 ghari geli]]ti mulgi ithe raathe

f [0 0 [ 0 0 ghari geli]] ti mulgiithe raathe

References

Abraham, P.T.(1978)Relative Clause in Malayalam. Annamalainagar: Department of Linguistics, Annamalai University (Publication no.62)

Åfarli, T. (1994) “A promotion analysis of restrictive relative clauses”, The Linguistic Review, 11.81-100

Annamalai E. and S.B. Steever (1998) “Modern Tamil”, in S.B.Steever (ed.) The Dravidian Languages, London, Routledge, pp.100-128.

Aoun, J. and Y.A. Li (2003) Essays on the Representational and Derivational Nature of Grammar. The Diversity of Wh-Constructions. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press

Basilico, D. (1996) “Head Position and Internally Headed Relative Clauses”, Language 72.498-532

Berry, K. and C.Berry (1999) A Description of Abun: a West Papuan language of Irian Jaya. Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies. The Australian National University, Canberra

Bhatt,R. (2002) “The Raising Analysis of Relative Clauses: Evidence from Adjectival Modification” Natural Language Semantics 10.43-90

Boisson, C.(1981) “Hiérarchie universelle des spécifications de temps, de lieu, et de manière”, Confluents, 7.69-124

Brame, M. (1967) “A new analysis of the relative clause: evidence for an interpretive theory”, unpublished ms., MIT

Carlson, G. (1977) “Amount Relatives”, Language, 53.520-542

Cinque, G. (1978) “La sintassi dei pronomi relativi ‘cui’ e ‘quale’ nell’italiano moderno” Rivista di grammatica generativa 3.31-126

Cinque, G. (1994) “On the evidence for partial N movement in the Romance DP,” in Cinque, G., J. Koster, J.-Y. Pollock, L. Rizzi & R. Zanuttini (eds.) Paths Towards Universal Grammar. Studies in Honor of Richard S. Kayne.Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 85-110

Cinque, G. (1996) “The antisymmetric programme: theoretical and typological implications”, Journal of Linguistics, 32.447-464

Cinque, G. (1999) Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York, Oxford University Press

Cinque,G. (2002) “Complement and Adverbial PPs: Implications for Clause Structure”, paper presented at the 25th Annual GLOW Colloquium, Amsterdam, April 9-11 2002 (later published in Cinque (2006), pp.145-166).

Cinque, G. (2003) “On Greenberg’s Universal 20 and the Semitic DP”, in L.-O. Delsing, C.Falk, G.Josefsson, and H.Sigurðsson (eds.) Grammar in Focus. Festschrift for Christer Platzack 18 November 2003. Vol.II, Lund, Department of Scandinavian Languages, pp.243-251

Cinque, G. (2005a) “Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and Its Exceptions”, Linguistic Inquiry 36.315-332

Cinque, G. (2005b) “A note on verb/object order and head/relative clause order”, in M.Vulchanova and T.A.Ǻfarli (eds.) Grammar and Beyond. Essays in honour of Lars Hellan. Oslo, Novus Press, pp.69-89

Cinque, G. (2006) Restructuring and Functional Heads. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol.4. New York, Oxford University Press

Cinque, G. (2007) “A note on linguistic theory and typology” Linguistic Typology 11.93-106

Cinque, G. (2008) “Two Types of Nonrestrictive Relatives”, in O.Bonami and P.Cabredo Hofherr (eds.) Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 7. Paris, pp. 99–137. (H

Cinque, G. (to appear) “Again on Tense, Aspect, Mood morpheme order and the “Mirror Principle”, in P.Svenonius (ed.) A Festschrift for Tarald Taraldsen. Oxford University Press

Cinque, G.(in preparation) The Prenominal Origin of Relative Clauses.

Citko, B. (2001) “Deletion Under Identityin Relative Clauses”, NELS 31.131-145

Cole, P. (1987) “The Structure of Internally Headed Relative Clauses”, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5.277-302

Comrie, B. and M.Polinsky (1999) “Form and Function in Syntax: Relative clauses in Tsez”, in M.Darnell, E.Moravcsik, F.Newmeyer, M.Noonan, K.Wheatley (eds.) Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics II: Case Studies. Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp.77-92

Culy, C. (1990) The Syntax and Semantics of Internally Headed Relative Clauses. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford Univ.

Dayal, V.S. (1991) “The syntax and semantics of correlatives” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9.637-686

den Dikken, M. and P. Singhapreecha (2004) “Complex Noun Phrases and Linkers” Syntax 7.1-54

4BDonohue, M. (2000) “One Phrase Structure”, inK.Allan and J.Henderson (eds.) Proceedings of ALS2k, the 2000 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society (H

Donohue, M. (2002) “Tobati”, in J.Lynch, M.Ross, and T.Crowley (eds.) The Oceanic Languages, Richmond (Surrey), Curzon, pp.186-203

Du Feu, V. (1999) Rapanui. London, Routledge

Enrico, J. (2003)Haida Syntax. Vol.I. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press

Faraclas, N.G. (1984) A Grammar of Obolo. Bloomington, Indiana University Linguistics Club

Frajzyngier, Z. and E. Johnston (2005) A Grammar of Mina. Berlin, Mouton De Gruyter

Gorbet, L.(1976) A Grammar of Diegueño Nominals. New York: Garland

Greenberg, J.H. (1963) “Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements”, in J.Greenberg (ed.) Universals of Language, Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press, pp.73-113

Grosu, A. (2000) “The semantic diversity of internally-headed relative clauses”, in C. Schaner-Wolles et al. (eds) Naturally! Linguistic studies in honour of Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler presented on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Torino, Rosenberg & Sellier, pp.143-152

Grosu, A. and F. Landman (1998) “Strange relatives of the third kind”, Natural Language Semantics 6.125-170

Hawkins, J.A. (1983) Word Order Universals. New York, Academic Press

Heim, I. (1987) “Where does the definiteness restriction apply? Evidence from the definiteness of variables”, in E.J.Reuland and A.G.B. ter Meulen (eds.) The Representation of (In)definiteness. Cambridge: CUP, pp.21-42.

Hetzron, R. (1978) “On the Relative Order of Adjectives” in H. Seiler (ed.) Language Universals. Tübingen, Narr, pp. 165-184

Hinterhölzl, R. (2002) “Event-related Adjuncts and the OV/VO Distinction”, in K.Magerdoomian and L.A. Bar-el (eds.) Proceedings of the 20th West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics. Somerville, Cascadilla, pp.276-289

Hiraiwa, K.(2005)Dimensions of Symmetry in Syntax: Agreement and Clausal Architecture. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT

Houston, J.R. (1974) “Dari Relative Clauses”, Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 4(1).32-58

Hulsey,S. and U.Sauerland (2006) “Sorting Out Relative Clauses” Natural Language Semantics 14.111-137

Junghare, I.Y. (1974) “Restrictive Relative Clauses in Marathi” Indian Linguistics, 34(4).251-262

Kameshima, N. (1989) The syntax of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in Japanese. Ph.D.Dissertation, University of Wisconsin – Madison

Kayne, R.S. (1994) The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press