Postposing

Question

The chief executive of Apple, Timothy D. Cook, has a prediction: the day will come when tablet devices like the Apple iPad outsell traditional personal computers.

Q1) Is this a case of postposing?

Another example: I met a man the other day who says he knows you.

I notice that the tense used in the subordianate clause is in present form, but it has future time reference.

Q2) My question is whether you should always use the present tense in a when-clause functioning as a relative clause when you refer to future time.

I'd appreciate your help.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

jooneyThe chief executive of Apple, Timothy D. Cook, has a prediction: the day will come when tablet devices like the Apple iPad outsell traditional personal computers.Q1) Is this a case of postposing?

I'm not sure the experts would call it 'postposing', even though the relative clause is postposed. I only know it as "heavy movement", that is, a heavy clause (a clause with lots of words) is moved to the right, and a very short phrase or clause is moved to the left so it won't sound odd at the end.

Does Huddleston say anything about it? (I should look it up, but maybe you know already.)

jooneyAnother example: I met a man the other day who says he knows you.

Similar. The writer wants to avoid the oddity of "he knows you the other day" by keeping the adverbial "the other day" closer to its verb ("met").

The basic principles in these cases are to keep related words close together as much as possible and to place short groups before long groups of words. It's almost more of a practical, rhetorical device than a grammatical one, because it's related to the reader's (listener's) attention span.

jooneyQ2) My question is whether you should always use the present tense in a when-clause functioning as a relative clause when you refer to future time.

Not necessarily. will outsell would have worked just as well.

CJ

Jooney · Answer

Thank you for your answer, CJ.

Here is what Huddleston notes about "postposing of relative clause"("postposing of relative clause" is his exact wording):

"This construction is most likely when the informational content of the relative clause is greater than that of the material that would follow it in the matrix clause if it occupied the default position following the antecedent. It will generally be avoided if it would result in possible confusion as to what was the intended antecedent."

So I think what he says about it is basically the same as your explanation.

As for your answer to quesiton #2, the writer using the presnet tense over a future auxiliary will was just his preference, correct?

CalifJim · Answer

jooneySo I think what he says about it is basically the same as your explanation.

Yes. I agree. But he says it in a more formal, academic way, of course.

jooneyAs for your answer to quesiton #2, the writer using the presnet tense over a future auxiliary will was just his preference, correct?

Correct. And don't forget that the present can be used for future time anyway. (We leave for Paris tomorrow.)

Personally, I think will is omitted before outsell because it already occurred earlier (will come). Too many wills in a sequence can sound strange (stylistically). (Just my personal opinion.)

CJ

Jooney · Answer

I think will is omitted before outsell because it already occurred earlier (will come). Too many wills in a sequence can sound strange (stylistically).

That seems to be a very valid reason for the omission. Thank you so much for your help.

Postposing

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions