Revisiting continuative relative clauses: towards a unified account

Title: Revisiting continuative relative clauses: towards a unified account
Source document: Linguistica Brunensia. 2017, vol. 65, iss. 1, pp. 81-96
  • ISSN
    1803-7410 (print)
    2336-4440 (online)
Type: Article
License: Not specified license

Notice: These citations are automatically created and might not follow citation rules properly.

In this paper, a new syntactic analysis of continuative relative clauses in German is proposed that unifies them with the syntax of appositive relative clauses in general. The analysis is based on the idea that continuative relative clauses are contained in a cleft-like main clause CP2, which is structurally disintegrated from the host clause CP1. Except for the continuative relative clause, all material in CP2 undergoes phonological deletion. We show that such an analysis sheds light on certain idiosyncrasies of continuative relative clauses, like the choice of relative pronouns and Principle C effects, and that it successfully captures a number of their basic properties. Moreover, the analysis gives a new twist to recent arguments in favor of an integration approach to appositive relative clauses based on ellipsis.
[The support by the German Research Foundation (DFG-Forschergruppe 1783 "Relativsätze")]
[1] Arnold, Doug. 2007. Non-Restrictive Relatives are not Orphans. Journal of Linguistics 43(2), pp. 272–309.

[2] Arnold, Doug – Borsley, Robert. 2008. Non-Restrictive Relative Clauses, Ellipsis and Anaphora. In Müller, Stefan, ed. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG08). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 5–25.

[3] Brandt, Margareta. 1990. Weiterführende Nebensätze: Zu ihrer Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

[4] Fabb, Nigel. 1990. The Difference Between English Restrictive and Non-Restrictive Relative Clauses. Journal of Linguistics 26, pp. 57–78. | DOI 10.1017/S0022226700014420

[5] Griffiths, James – Vries, Mark de. 2013. The Syntactic Integration of Appositives: Evidence From Fragments and Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 44(2), pp. 332–344. | DOI 10.1162/LING_a_00131

[6] Haider, Hubert. 1993. Deutsche Syntax – generativ. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

[7] Holler, Anke. 2005. Weiterführende Relativsätze: Empirische und theoretische Aspekte. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

[8] Holler, Anke. 2007. Uniform oder different? Zum syntaktischen Status nicht-restriktiver Relativsätze. Deutsche Sprache 3, pp. 250–270.

[9] Jackendoff, Ray. 1977. X'-Syntax: A Theory of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[10] Merchant, Jason. 2001. The Syntax of Silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[11] Merchant, Jason. 2004. Fragments and Ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27, pp. 661–738. | DOI 10.1007/s10988-005-7378-3

[12] Onea, Edgar – Ott, Dennis. 2015. On the Form and Meaning of Appositives. In Proceedings of NELS 45, pp. 203–212.

[13] Ott, Dennis. 2016. Fragment Anchors do not Support the Syntactic integration of Appositive Relative Clauses: Reply to Griffiths & de Vries 2013. Linguistic Inquiry 47(3), pp. 580–590.

[14] Potts, Chris. 2005. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford University Press.

[15] Ross, John R. 1969. Guess who? In Binnick, Robert et al., eds. Papers from the 5th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 252–286.

[16] Schlenker, Philippe. 2007. Expressive Presuppositions. Theoretical Linguistics 33, pp. 237–246.

[17] Vries, Mark de. 2006. The Syntax of Appositive Relativization: On Specifying Coordination, False Free Relatives, and Promotion. Linguistic Inquiry 37(2), pp. 229–270. | DOI 10.1162/ling.2006.37.2.229