Conclusions
In this paper I have argued for two main points: (1) that IHRCs have at S-structure phonologically null heads which are coindexed with a nominal inside the modifying clause that is interpreted as the head; and (2) that at LF the nominal interpreted as the head has been raised from the modifying clause into head position. Evidence for the proposed S-structure is based on anomalies in the distribution of IHRCs cross-linguistically, and on the implications of the proposed structure for subjacency in the Quechua languages. IHRCs also provide the basis for an argument that in at least some languages both precedence and command are relevant to binding.
Evidence for the proposed LF structure is drawn from Imbabura Quechua and from Williamson's (1987) study of IHRCs in Lakhota, in which a head raising analysis is proposed. It is shown that in Imbabura IHRCs interact with the ECP and subjacency in a fashion which is predicted if head raising has applied. In addition, the semantic interpretation of relative clauses in Imbabura Quechua and similar languages having both IHRCs and headed relative clauses is simplified if IHRCs are headed at LF. The arguments from Lakhota show that the distribution of negative indefinite and irrealis indefinite determiners is predicted if IHRCs have lexical heads at LF.
This paper builds upon earlier work of mine which appeared in prepublication form in a different theoretical context in the working papers of the Department of Linguistics of the University of Texas. I would like to reiterate my thanks to Emmon Bach, Polly Jacobson, Wayne Harbert, Paul Hirschbühler and Sue Schmerling for their comments on that work. An idea similar to that which forms the core of section III was previously proposed by Emmon Bach (1974) with respect to the adjoined relative clauses in South Asian languages. The research reported on in this paper was supported in part by the National Science Council of the Republic of China, the National Science Foundation (grant #BNS7904784), the SSRC and the ACLS Joint Committee on Latin American Studies, the Center for Latin American Studies of the University of Illinois and the Research Board of the University of Illinois. This support is acknowledged with gratitude.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bach, Emmon: 1974, Syntactic Theory, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Bergvall, Victoria L.: 1984, ‘Problems for Subjacency and the ECP from Kikuyu In Situ WH Questions’, paper presented at the 1984 Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.
Bird, Charles: 1966, ‘Determination in Bambara’, The Journal of West African Languages III, 5–12.
Carden, Guy: 1981a, ‘Blocked Forward Coreference with Clefts’, (unpublished).
--: 1981b, ‘Blocked Forward Coreference: Evidence for a Movement Analysis with Clausemate Coreference’, paper presented at the 1981 meeting of the Canadian Linguistic Association.
—: 1986, ‘Blocked Forward Coreference: Theoretical Implications of the Acquisition Data’, in B. Lust (ed.), Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora: Volume I, Defining the Constraints, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 319–357.
Carden, Guy and T. Dieterich: 1980, ‘Introspection, Observation and Experiment: An Example Where Experiment Pays Off’, Philosophy of Science Association 2, 583–597.
Chomsky, Noam: 1973, ‘Conditions on Transformations’, in S. R. Anderson and P. Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
—: 1977, ‘On Wh-Movement’, in Culicover et al., (eds.), Formal Syntax, Academic Press, New York.
—: 1980, ‘On Binding’, Linguistic Inquiry 11, 1–46.
—: 1981a, Lectures on Government and Binding: the Pisa Lectures, Foris Publications, Dordrecht.
—: 1981b, Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Cole, Peter: 1982a, Imbabura Quechua, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
—: 1982b, ‘On Defining Bounding Nodes for Subjacency: Evidence from Imbabura Quechua’, Linguistic Inquiry 13, 139–145.
Cole, Peter, Wayne Harbert, and Gabriella Hermon: 1982, ‘Headless Relative Clauses in Quechua’, International Journal of American Linguistics 48, 113–124.
Cole, Peter, W. Harbert, S. Sridhar, S. Hashimoto, C. Nelson, and D. Smietana: 1977, ‘Noun Phrase Accessibility and Island Constraints’, in P. Cole and J. Sadock (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Grammatical Relations, Academic Press, New York.
Gorbet, Larry: 1976, A Grammar of Dìequeño Nominals, Garland Publishing, New York.
—: 1977, ‘Headless Relatives in the Southwest: Are They Related?’ Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 3, 270–278.
Hermon, Gabriella: 1981, Non-Nominative Subject Constructions in the Government and Binding Framework, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
—: 1985, Syntactic Modularity, Foris Publications, Dordrecht.
Huang, James: 1982, Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
—: 1984, ‘On the Distribution and Reference of Empty Pronouns’, Linguistic Inquiry 15, 531–574.
Keenan, Edward: 1978, ‘Relative Clauses in the Languages of the World’, University of California at Los Angeles.
Kuno, Susumu: 1975, ‘Three Perspectives in the Functional Approach to Syntax, in R. Grossman et al. (eds.), Papers from the Parasession on Functionalism, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki: 1976, ‘Headless Relative Clauses in Modern Japanese and the Relevancy Condition’, Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 2, 269–279.
Langacker, Ronald: 1969, ‘On Pronominalization and the Chain of Command’, in D. Reibel and S. Schane (eds.), Modern Studies in English, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Lakoff, George: 1968, Pronouns and Reference, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Ind.
Li, Charles and Sandra Thompson: 1978, ‘Relativization Strategies in Wappo’, Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 4, 106–113.
Nishigauchi, T.: 1983, ‘Japanese LF: Subjacency Versus ECP’, paper presented at the Third Korean-Japanese Joint Workshop, Seoul, Korea.
Platero, Paul: 1974, ‘The Navajo Relative Clause’, International Journal of American Linguistics 40, 202–246.
Reinhart, Tanya: 1976, The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
—: 1981, ‘Definite NP Anaphora and C-Command Domains’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 605–636.
Ross, John R.: 1969, ‘On the Cyclic Nature of English Pronominalization’, in D. Riebel and S. Schane (eds.), Modern Studies in English, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Wahba, Wafaa: 1984, WH-Constructions in Egyptian Arabic, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Williamson, J.: 1987, ‘An Indefiniteness Restriction for Relative Clauses in Lakhota’, in E. Reuland and A. ter Meulen (eds.), On the Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 168–190.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I would like to thank Guy Carden, Sandy Chung, John Goldsmith, Jeanne Gibson, Gaby Hermon, James Huang, Osvaldo Jaeggli, Jerry Morgan, Paul Neubauer, Eduardo Raposo, Herb Stahlke, Janice Williamson, and a number of anonymous reviewers for their comments on the ideas put forward in this paper. I would also like to thank the members of the UCSD Linguistics Department for their hospitality during the time the first draft of this paper was being written. The present version was written while I was a visitor at Tamkang University and Tsing Hua University, Taiwan, the Republic of China. I would like to express my appreciation for the assistance given to me by both universities. Thanks are also due to Steve Helmreich for invaluable editorial assistance.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cole, P. The structure of internally headed relative clauses. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 5, 277–302 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166587
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166587