Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2023
Edited by Sterre Leufkens and Marco Bril
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 40] 2023
► pp. 230–247

Are there different kinds of appositive relative clauses?

| University of Groningen

In his latest book on relative clauses, Cinque claims that there are two fundamentally different kinds of appositive (non-restrictive) relative clauses. The unintegrated ones are the typical English type, the integrated ones are found in various languages, including Chinese and Japanese. This second type shares some characteristics with restrictive relatives, and seems to require a different syntactic analysis. Some languages, like Italian, supposedly have both types. A list of a dozen criteria differentiates the two, such as the use of relative pronouns and the possibility of heavy pied piping. However, when we carefully look at Dutch and other languages, the picture starts to blur considerably, and an abundance of (micro)variation shows up. This is problematic. I argue that the suggested criteria do not add up to two natural classes at all and are in fact non-explanatory. Therefore, we need to focus on what is truly fundamental to non-restrictiveness, which leads to a different perspective on the matter.

Keywords: appositives, integrated vs. unintegrated constructions, non-restrictive interpretation, relative clauses, relative pronouns
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction and background
  • 2.Non-restrictive relative clauses in Dutch
    • Illocutionary independence
    • RC split across discourse (and possibly speakers)
    • Split antecedent
    • Retention of internal head and non-identical internal head
    • Non-Nominal antecedent
    • Coordinated wh
    • Heavy pied piping
    • Parasitic gap
    • Reflexive antecedent
  • 3.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 3 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00089.dev
References
Bianchi, Valentina
1999 Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boef, Eefje
2012 Doubling in relative clauses. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Utrecht. Utrecht: LOT.
Cardoso, Adriana & Mark de Vries
2010 “Internal and External Heads in Appositive Constructions.” Manuscript, University of Lisbon & University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1977 “On wh-movement.” In Formal syntax: Proceedings of the 1976 MSSB-Irvine Conference on the Formal Syntax of Natural Language ed. by Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow & Adrian Akmajian, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
2006 “Two Types of Appositives.” University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 161, 7–56.Google Scholar
2019 “A Note on Relative Clauses with Split Antecedents.” In Mapping Linguistic Data: Essays in honour of Liliane Haegeman ed. by Metin Bağrıaçık, Anne Breitbarth & Karen De Clercq, 75–81. Ghent: Ghent University.Google Scholar
2020 The Syntax of Relative Clauses: A Unified Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dehé, Nicole
2014 Parentheticals in Spoken English: The Syntax-Prosody Relation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Del Gobbo, Francesca
2003 “Appositives at the Interface.” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Irvine.
2008 “On the syntax and semantics of appositive relative clauses.” In Parentheticals ed. by Nicole Dehé & Yordanka Kavalova, 173–201. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, James
2015 On appositives. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Groningen. Utrecht: LOT.
Grosu, Alexander
2002 “Strange Relatives at the Interface of two Millennia.” Glot International 61, 145–167.Google Scholar
Güneş, Güliz
2015 Deriving prosodic structures. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Groningen. Utrecht: LOT.
Heringa, Herman
2011 Appositional constructions. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Groningen. Utrecht: LOT.
McKinney-Bock, Katherine
2013 “Deriving split-antecedent relative clauses.” University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 19 (1), art.14, 112–122.Google Scholar
Salzmann, Martin
2017 Reconstruction and Resumption in Indirect A’-dependencies. On the Syntax of Prolepsis and Relativization in (Swiss) German and beyond. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter/Mouton.Google Scholar
Smits, Rik
1988 The Relative and Cleft Constructions of the Germanic and Romance Languages. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tilburg. Dordrecht: Foris.
Truckenbrodt, Hubert
2015 “Intonation phrases and speech acts.” In Parenthesis and ellipsis: cross-linguistic and theoretical perspectives ed. by Marlies Kluck, Dennis Ott & Mark de Vries. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Vries, Mark
2002 The Syntax of Relativization. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Utrecht: LOT.
2005 “The Fall and Rise of Universals on Relativization.” Journal of Universal Language 61, 125–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006a “The Syntax of Appositive Relativization. On Specifying Coordination, False Free Relatives and Promotion.” Linguistic Inquiry 371, 229–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006b Possessive Relatives and (Heavy) Pied Piping. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 91, 1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012a “Parenthetical main clauses – or not? On appositives and quasi-relatives.” In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons ed. by Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye, 177–201. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012b “Unconventional Mergers.” In Ways of Structure Building ed. by Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria & Vidal Valmala, 143–166. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar