Grammarians & Linguists: Relative Clauses

Question

I thought relative clauses must be grammatical when the sentence is in its natural word-order.

EG (please ignore the rules about restrictiveness in my examples):

This is the house in which I live= I live in which (the house).

This is the house which my parents owned= My parents owned which (the house).

This is the house which was sold yesterday= Which (the house) was sold yesterday.

This sentence doesn't render a grammatical sentence, I think, when in its natural word order:

You must attend this meeting, failing which you will be disqualified= failing (to attend) you will be disqualified.

Please can you explain this relative clause structure?

Thank you.

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

I don't understand the second rendition of each of your first 3 sentences.

English 1b3 · Answer

I'm not claiming they would be written as such. The sentences would be fine if the words in brackets were used instead of the pronoun 'which.' I just used which to show where it would be.

Mister Micawber · Answer

I am going to the house, which I will not enjoy doing.
This is the house, which I cannot believe.

-- Do these offer the same problem to you?

English 1b3 · Answer

Yes, I never really felt like my method of testing was really accurate. I was waiting for someone to prove this much.

Can you tell elighten me about this relative clause I'm having trouble with? I'm not really sure what to ask, but do you kind of understand why I don't understand it?

Mister Micawber · Answer

Though you said something about ignoring it, it looks to me as if it is a difference between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, only the latter of which seems to be able to modify beyond the nearest preceding noun phrase.

BillJ · Answer

English 1b3I thought relative clauses must be grammatical when the sentence is in its natural word-order. EG (please ignore the rules about restrictiveness in my examples):

This is the house in which I live= I live in which (the house).

This is the house which my parents owned= My parents owned which (the house).

This is the house which was sold yesterday= Which (the house) was sold yesterday.

Basically that's true. In some straightforward relatives like those three examples, it's easy to simply put the clause in its basic word order and to replace the relative pronoun with its antecedent, so it all make sense. But there are others where it's not quite so easy, as you've found out with your last example:
English 1b3This sentence doesn't render a grammatical sentence, I think, when in its natural word order: You must attend this meeting, failing which you will be disqualified= failing (to attend) you will be disqualified. Please can you explain this relative clause structure?
Here, the antecedent of 'which' is not just a simple noun like 'house', but the entire preceding clause "You must attend this meeting". When the antecedent is a clause, the interpretation is not so straightforward because we may have to extract part of the meaning of the clause. So it's not "Failing you must attend this meeting", but "Failing you attend this meeting" - i.e. "If you don't attend this meeting". So you could think of the clause as "If you don't attend this meeting you will be disqualified".

BillJ

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi,

Couldn't we say failing is a preposition here, meaning 'in the absence of'?

This would mean the sentence makes more sense to me.

BillJ · Answer

English 1b3Hi, Couldn't we say failing is a preposition here, meaning 'in the absence of'? This would mean the sentence makes more sense to me.

But it is a preposition! - what else did you think it was? I rather assumed you knew that when I posted my reply. Quite often a relative construction of the wh type contains a 'relative phrase' - typically a prepositional phrase such as 'failing which', 'from which', 'to which', 'in which' etc.

BillJ

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi, BillJ

BillJwhat else did you think it was?

I took it to be a verb--a verbal, a participial.

As in, if you fail to attend/failing to attend, you..

Now that I know it is a preposition, the relative clause looks like this:

You must attend this meeting, failing which you will be disqualified= you will be disqualified in the absence of which (attending this meeting).

So there is no reason to think of it as a reduced 'if' clause, as you wrote, right?

And while I have you here, BillJ, I have another tricky relative clause construction:

The position remains active until the listed closing date/5pm, at which point we will be in contact.

Why does the above need a noun 'point' after which? Whereas this does not? Can you tell me more about 'which' being used a determiner of a noun, please?

I played soccer for five years, during (which) I was a midfielder.

Anonymous · Answer

English 1b3Now that I know it is a preposition, the relative clause looks like this: You must attend this meeting, failing which you will be disqualified= you will be disqualified in the absence of which (attending this meeting).

That's not how I read it. I thought I gave you the interpretation of 'which' in my earlier post. The point is that when the antecedent is a clause ("You must attend this meeting") we may need to extract part of the meaning from the clause. So, "Failing which" = "Failing you attend this meeting" - i.e. "If you don't attend this meeting". That's the way to think of it.

English 1b3So there is no reason to think of it as a reduced 'if' clause, as you wrote, right?

See above.

English 1b3The position remains active until the listed closing date/5pm, at which point we will be in contact. Why does the above need a noun 'point' after which?

'Which' is a determinative so it needs a noun to determine - in this case it's 'point'.

English 1b3Whereas this does not? Can you tell me more about 'which' being used a determiner of a noun, please?

I played soccer for five years, during (which) I was a midfielder.

It DOES need a noun, but it's missing, so the sentence is ungrammatical. The same point as above applies i.e. 'which' is a determinative here so it needs a noun to determine. The difference between this sentence and the one above is that here the noun has been wrongly omitted. If we return the missing noun (typically 'time') we get the correct phrase 'during which time'. In full the sentence is "I played soccer for five years, during which time I was a midfielder". Note that the relativised element here is 'which time' (not just 'which'); it is this element that derives its interpretation from the antecedent 'five years'.

Note that 'which' occurs in integrated relatives only as a pronoun but, as we've just seen, in supplementary relatives it can also be a determinative.

BillJ

Grammarians & Linguists: Relative Clauses

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions