Relative Clauses: Types, Functions, and Uses

Posted on Dec 17, 2024 in History

Relative clauses are finite clauses that modify a noun. They are often classified according to their function:

Restrictive vs. Non-Restrictive Relative Clauses

• Restrictive relative clauses help identify the reference of the head noun. They are not separated by commas from the rest of the sentence in written texts or by pauses in spoken language.
  • Example: The man that is sitting on the terrace is my boss.
• Non-restrictive relative clauses add descriptive details about the head noun, whose identity or reference is already established. In writing, they are normally separated from the head noun by a comma.
  • Example: Alexander Fleming, who discovered penicillin, was British.

The information given in non-restrictive clauses is often not directly connected to the main point of a text; in news, they might give some new information in which the readers might be interested. Restrictive relative clauses are more common than non-restrictive ones. Non-restrictive clauses are used more in newspaper stories than in any other register.

Restrictive and Non-Restrictive Functions with Other Postmodifiers

Postmodifiers can also be classified by their function:

• Restrictive functions:
  • -ed clauses: (no examples provided in the original text)
  • -ing clauses: The police chased the cycling boys.
  • Restrictive prepositional phrases: Staff of press offices is on strike.
• Non-restrictive functions are less common than relative clauses.
  • -ed clauses: A beautiful poem, written by Joseph, has been published.
  • -ing clauses: Sara, studying very hard, has finally graduated.
  • Prepositional phrases: Bath, in England, is a beautiful town.
  • Appositive noun phrases (exceptional, are usually non-restrictive): Sofia, a lovely seven-year-old, has won this year’s contest. / Both kinds of cheese, cheddar and parmesan, are delicious.

Postmodification by Relative Clauses

Three key components of relative clauses are:

• The head noun: The noun modified by the relative clause.
• The relativizer: The word that introduces the relative clause and refers to the same person or thing as the head noun (e.g., who, that, which).
• The gap: The place of the constituent that is missing in the relative clause; in meaning, this gap corresponds to the head noun.

Example: This is the dress that my sister bought (gap: dress, direct object) for my wedding.

Discourse Choice Among Relativizers

In Standard English, relative clauses can be constructed using eight different relativizers:

• Five are relative pronouns: that, who, whom, whose, which. They substitute a noun phrase in the relative clause (subject, direct object, etc.).
  • Example: She is the girl to whom I gave my cat.
• Three are relative adverbs: when, where, why. They substitute an adverbial phrase. The relative adverb where stands for a whole prepositional phrase that expresses an adverbial of place.
  • Example: The country where I was born.

The relativizer can be omitted in many cases, except in subject gaps. This is known as the zero relativizer.

Example: The dog Ø Susan owns.

The relativizers that, who, and which are the most frequent forms since they are more flexible in the gap position. Their most common use is with subject gaps.

Example: There are children who like eating vegetables.

Other gaps:

• Direct object: She gave me the sweets that nobody wanted.
• Complement of a preposition: There are horror stories from which good films have been made.

When the relative pronoun is part of a prepositional phrase, the preposition can go before the relative pronoun, or it can be left stranded, as in:

Examples: The lady who I buy the flowers from / The lady from whom I buy the flowers.

• Circumstance adverbial (time, manner, etc.).
  • Examples: Carol wanted to write a book about the year that she was born in. / The only way that will allow you to reach the beach is down there.

Other Relativizers

The other relativizers are uncommon, and their use is limited to specific gap positions:

• Whom: Occurs only with non-subject noun phrase gaps.
• Whose: Only with possessive/genitive gaps.
• Where, when, why: Only with adverbial gaps.
• Zero: Only with non-subject gaps in restrictive relative clauses.

Thus, it would be impossible to omit the relative pronoun in a subject-gap relative clause such as:

Examples: There are children who eat… / *There are children eat.

Or a non-restrictive relative clause:

Examples: He asked Mary for a sweet, which he liked. / *He asked Mary for a sweet, he liked…

Relative Pronoun Choices

• That: Common in conversation and fiction. Usually used only with restrictive relative clauses.
• Zero: Common in conversation.
• Which: Common in news and academic prose. Used in both restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.
• Who: Common in news.
  • Example: A fifteen-year-old who was arrested…

Who vs. Which with Human and Non-Human Head Nouns

Who is used almost exclusively after human heads, while which is used after inanimate heads.

That and Zero with Human and Non-Human Head Nouns

That and zero can be used with both human and non-human head nouns.

Example: The girl that/who lives in that flat.

Who vs. Whom vs. That with Human Head Nouns

Who and whom are used with animate head nouns. Who is normally used with subject-gap positions, and whom with non-subject gaps. With non-restrictive relative clauses, there is a predilection to use who/whom rather than that or zero. That, with restrictive relative clauses, occurs with animate and inanimate heads, with gaps in subject or non-subject position, and it is an alternative to whom for animate head nouns and non-subject gaps. The choice of that over whom is preferred in informal discourse (conversation and fiction).

Which vs. That in Detail

Both are similar in their grammatical potential, but which is rare with animate heads. Which is considered more formal and is common in non-restrictive relative clauses. It can follow a preposition. Importantly, that cannot follow a preposition (e.g., *of that).

Whose vs. Of Which

Whose marks a possessive relationship between a human head noun and some other noun phrase, also with collective organizations (societies, governments, etc.). In academic prose, it is usual for whose to mark possessive relationships with completely inanimate, sometimes abstract, head nouns.

Example: Paella is a food whose main ingredient is rice.

An alternative to whose with inanimate head nouns is the phrase of which. An alternative way of introducing a relative clause with of which is to place only the prepositional phrase of which at the front, leaving the rest of the noun phrase to follow in its normal position in the relative clause.

Example: He joined a club of which the motto was, “The Whole…”

Similar meanings can be expressed in two other ways: a relative clause with which or that and the verb have (e.g., He joined a club which had the motto…) or a postmodifying prepositional phrase with the preposition with (e.g., He joined a club with the motto…).

Zero Relativizer

Whenever the gap is not in a subject position, it is possible to omit the whole relativizer in a restrictive relative clause. When the subject of the relative clause is a personal pronoun, this is most likely to happen since most pronouns distinguish between subject (nominative) and object forms (e.g., I, we, she, he vs. me, us, her, him). Thus, the presence of a subject pronoun, even if the relativizer is missing, will unmistakably mark the beginning of a relative clause.

Examples: The only drink we’ve had / The kind of clothes she wears.

The zero relativizer is found in all registers, but it is more common in conversation and fiction due to its colloquial associations.