"What" as a relative pronoun

Question

This is from A Student's Introduction to English Grammar (p.221):

"[32] i We arranged for them to meet the manager.

(...)

(c) The 'pseudo-cleft' construction

[35] ii What we arranged was for them to meet the manager.

The 'pseudo-cleft' is another construction belonging to the information packaging domain, and again the main discussion of it is in Ch. 15, §6.

For present purposes it is sufficient to see in broad outline how [35ii] differs from the structurally more elementary [32i]. The latter has been divided into two parts (as reflected in the 'cleft' component of the name). One part (for them to meet the manager) is made complement of the verb be, while the other (we arranged) is contained within the subject, which begins with the relative pronoun what."

-----------

I've got to admit that I'm confused with the categorization of the word what as the relative pronoun in [35ii]. I see What in the subject (What we arranged) as a fused-head, i.e., The thing which we arranged where The thing which is fused into the noun phrase What that, otherwise, was named as a relative pronoun by the authors of the handbook.

My question is: Is What in [35ii] a relative pronoun and if so, what would be an explanation for that?

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

Historically, the usage is "relative pronoun". (1828 and 1913 dictionaries.)

"Fused relative pronoun" is more contemporary terminology used by linguists, but it has not been recorded in the few dictionaries I checked.

The "introductory" book is simply being consistent with the dictionary entries.

See Macmillan dictionary discussion, which has no entry for "fused"

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/what

It contrasts with Wiktionary, which is self-contradictor. In the main entry #2, it is a pronoun and in #3 a "relative pronoun" as nonstandard English.

However, the in the translation section, entry #2 is termed a "relative pronoun"

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/what#Pronoun

CalifJim · Answer

anonymousI see What in the subject (What we arranged) as a fused-head, i.e., The thing which we arranged where The thing which is fused into the noun phrase What that, otherwise, was named as a relative pronoun by the authors of the handbook.

Fused into the noun phrase What? I'm not following this. What we arranged is the noun phrase, not just what.

Likewise, in the thing which, the thing which is not a noun phrase. The thing which we arranged is the noun phrase.

which is a relative pronoun. It is fused to the thing in the thing which in the form what. That makes what (in the given context) a fused relative pronoun.

anonymousIs What in [35ii] a relative pronoun

Yes, but it's a special kind called a fused relative pronoun.

Note, however, that terminology may have changed since Huddleston wrote that book. I believe all of those words that are found at the beginnings of relative clauses are now referred to by the catchall term "relative words" — at least by some writers in some books.

anonymousI see What in the subject (What we arranged) as a fused-head

Interesting viewpoint, but it doesn't seem to me to be an example of the central meaning of 'fused head'. That would be cases where the noun is missing after an adjective:

I like the white shirt, but Lucy prefers the red. (Fusion of 'red' with the noun 'shirt' makes 'red' the fused head of a noun phrase.)

what can't be used as a (non-fused) relative pronoun in standard English:

*The book what you gave me was really good.

CJ

"What" as a relative pronoun

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions