Basic English Syntax with Exercises

that-relative

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

There is another interesting difference between the use of interrogative and relative pronouns which shows that there is a possibility available for a relative pronoun that is not generally available with interrogatives. The restrictive relative is often noted to come in three different forms. One starts with a wh-relative pronoun and is called a wh-relative. Another starts with the complementiser that and is called a that-relative, and the third has nothing in front of the subject and is called a zero relative. These are exemplified below:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

Interestingly, although they do not start with a wh-element, both that-relatives and zero relatives contain a gap in the same place that they would if they did have a wh-element:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

We should first counter a myth about that-relatives that prevails from traditional grammars. In these it is common to find that at the beginning of the relative clause referred to as a relative pronoun, thus suggesting that it be given the same treatment as wh-elements. If this is true, then this element originates inside the clause and moves to the specifier of CP, as do wh-elements. But there are many reasons to believe that this word is not a wh-element but is, as appearances predict, a simple complementiser. Firstly, note that as would be predicated on the assumption that it is a complementiser, that is only ever used in finite clauses and although wh-elements can marginally be used in non-finite clauses, that never is:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

Another argument that that is not a relative pronoun in that-relatives is that it does not behave like a wh-element with respect to prepositions. Note the following two possibilities with a wh-relative:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

When the wh-element is part of a PP it has the option of moving alone, a strategy known as preposition stranding, or of taking the whole PP with it, a strategy known as pied-piping (after the story of the Pied Piper of Hamlin, who played his pipes and the rats followed him – the connection between prepositions and rats is, however, mysterious). If that were a relative pronoun, we might expect the same options to be available in that-relatives. But this is not true:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

One explanation for why we do not get pied piping with a that-relatives is that that is not a relative pronoun and did not originate in the gapped position and hence the preposition could not be pied-piped by it.

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

If that is a complementiser in the that-relatives, then that-relatives and zero relatives are alike in that they do not contain a wh-element and the difference appears to be the standard ability of the complementiser to be overt or covert in a finite clause:

7.4.2 A comparison between relative and interrogative clauses

If this is true, then the same must be true of all relatives, including that and zero ones. The fact that we cannot detect a wh-element in these relatives suggests that they should be analysed as containing an empty wh-element, similar to the empty operator in yes–no questions, but this time behaving like the type of wh-element that originates inside the IP and moves to the spec of CP: