Relative Clause Defined

Relative clauses are subordinate clauses that attach to nouns. Because they add
information to a noun, some grammarians and ESL/EFL teachers call
them adjective clauses.

Examples of Sentences with Relative Clauses

"Societies to Social Networks"
Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach

Relative Clause Structure

To make a relative clause, we take a sentence, turn it into a subordinate clause,

and attach that clause to a noun. For this process to occur, the two sentences
must share the same noun. Look at the following two sentences. What noun is
shared by both sentences?
#A1. I read a book.

#A2. The book explains the differences between clauses and phrases.

To use the second sentence as a relative clause, it has to be changed by adding

the appropriate relative pronoun--who, whom, that, which, or whose--selected
on the basis of a combination of meaning and syntax. For example, whom is
used to refer to people (or animals closely associated with people) and it must
be the object of a verb or preposition.

The relative pronoun serves two functions--it is a subordinating conjunction

and it is a part of the syntax of the clause. In this example, the relative
pronoun that is added. It is a connecting word--but it is also the subject of
sentence #2 and of the new relative clause:

Relative clause: that explains the differences between clauses and phrases

New sentence: I read a book that explains the differences between clauses and
phrases.

subject: I
verb: read
direct object: a book that explains the differences between clauses and phrases
In the following example, the internal structure of the relative clause is more
complicated because the noun that is the focus of the clause is not the subject of
the clause. The relative pronoun is a connecting word and it is also the direct
object
#B1. I read a book.
#B2. I bought the book to help me prepare for class.
Relative clause process step 1--insert the relative pronoun: I bought that to
help me prepare for class
Relative clause process step 2--move the relative pronoun to the front of the
clause: that I bought to help me prepare for class
Relative clause process step 3--attach the relative clause to its noun
#B3: I read a book that I bought to help me prepare for class.
subject: I
verb: read
direct object: a book that I bought to help me prepare for class
Relative Clause Types

Like wh-questions, relative clauses come in two major types: (1) those that
have the relative pronoun as the subject of the clause and (2) those that have the
relative pronoun as something other than the subject of the clause (object or
complement or object of a preposition).

In addition, relative clauses can be added to nouns in just about any part of a
sentence--at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of sentences. Let's
analyze the location and type of relative clause in each of the following
sentences:

#1. I bought a book that was highly recommended by my sister.

#2. I bought a book that my sister recommended.
#3. The book that is required for this workshop comes highly recommended.
#4. The book that my sister recommended was quite useful.

#1 I bought a book that was highly recommended by my

sister.
Core sentence I bought a book.
Sentence that The book was highly recommended by
became the my sister.
relative clause
Relative subject of the relative clause
Pronoun
Function
Location of the it's at the end of the sentence--attached
relative clause to the noun that's the direct object--part
of the large noun phrase that is the direct
object

#2 I bought a book that my sister recommended.

Core sentence I bought a book.
Sentence that My sister recommended the book.
became the
relative clause
Relative direct object of the relative clause
Pronoun
Function
Location of the it's at the end of the sentence--attached
relative clause to the noun that's the direct object--part
 of the large noun phrase that is the direct
object

#3 The book that is required for this workshop comes

highly recommended.
Core sentence The book comes highly recommended.
Sentence that The book is required for this workshop.
became the
relative clause
Relative subject of the relative clause
Pronoun
Function
Location of the it's at the beginning of the sentence--
relative clause attached to the noun that's the subject--
part of the large noun phrase that is the
subject of the sentence

#4 The book that my sister recommended was quite useful.

Core sentence The book was quite useful.
Sentence that My sister recommended the book.
became the
relative clause
Relative direct object of the relative clause
Pronoun
Function
Location of the it's at the beginning of the sentence--
relative clause attached to the noun that's the subject--
part of the large noun phrase that is the
subject of the sentence

Restrictive vs. Non-restrictive Relative Pronouns

Relative clauses are also classified depending on their relationship with the
noun they modify. A restrictive relative pronoun identifies its noun--and
divides the world into categories. Look at our book example: The book that my
sister recommended was quite useful. The relative clause points to a particular
book--and also means that there are books that my sister did not recommend.

A non-restrictive relative clause is used to give additional information about the

noun but not to identify it or to create categories. Look at this example:

The Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English, which was
published in 2002, is based on the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written
English.

The relative clause--which was published in 2002--gives additional information

about the book but it doesn't say that there are two Student Grammars--one
published in 2002 and another at some other date.

Let's try this definition again by analyzing these two sentences. How many
groups of students is each sentence talking about?

1. The students who turned their papers in early went to a party.

2. The students, who want to teach ESL/EFL, try to get a lot of classroom
experience.

What do you think? #1--there are two groups of students. Those who turned in
their papers early and those who didn't. So, the relative clause in #1 is a
restrictive relative clause.

#2--that's about all of the students. It's non-restrictive. Notice that the old
definition about non-restrictives adding unimportant information is not true.
It's even silly. Why would you provide un-important information?! A non-
restrictive provides information that the writer wants you to have but it is
attached to a noun that is already identified and doesn't need anything else to
make you know which one you are talking about.

Probably for teaching purposes, the clearest examples of non-restrictive relative

clauses are those that go with proper nouns:

Douglas Biber, who is a well-known corpus linguist, teaches at the University

of Northern Arizona.

At TESOL, I attended a lecture by Diane Larsen-Freeman, who is one of the

co-authors of the Grammar Book.

Better examples for use in our ESL/EFL classes would be something from a
textbook they are using like this example I found in my sociology source:
A classic example of an early woman sociologist is Harriet Martineau (1802-
1876), who was born into a wealthy English family.
This non-restrictive relative clause gives important information that adds to our
understanding of Harriet Martineau but is not needed to define who she was.

Relative Pronoun Reduction

Relative pronouns can sometimes be left out; they are understood but not given
in the sentence as in the following examples:

I bought a book my sister recommended.

The book my sister recommended was quite useful.

If the relative pronoun is the subject of its clause, then it must be kept.
Otherwise, the relative pronoun can generally be dropped. In which of these
sentences, can the relative pronoun be left out? Where is it required?

#1. I bought a book that was highly
recommended by my sister.
#2. I bought a book that my sister
recommended.
#3. The book that is required for this required, it's the subject
workshop comes highly
recommended.
#4. The book that my sister
recommended was quite useful.
required, it's the subject
of the relative clause
not required, it's the
direct object of the
relative clause
of the relative clause
not required, it's the
direct object of the
relative clause

Relative Clauses & Prepositions

Relative clause structure gets more complicated when a prepositional phrase is

involved. The basic problem is deciding what to do with the preposition--
where does it go when the clause is put into the sentence. Here's an example:

#1: At TESOL, I bought a book.

#2: I got new ideas about teaching from the book.

Relative clause creation step #1--insert the pronoun as the object of the
preposition: I got new ideas about teaching from that

Relative clause creation step #2--front the pronoun: but....what to front? Where
does the preposition go? Actually, you have two choices:

Choice #1: Leave the preposition at the end: that I got new ideas about
teaching from...

At TESOL, I bought a book that I got new ideas about teaching grammar from.

Choice #2: Move the preposition with its object to the front. But notice that if
you use this approach, you cannot use that. You have to use which.

*At TESOL, I bought a book from that I got new ideas about teaching
grammar.

At TESOL, I bought a book from which I got new ideas about teaching
grammar.

As our students struggle with making this type of combination, you'll find
students leaving the preposition out altogether:
*At TESOL, I bought a book that I got new ideas about teaching grammar.
Relative Clauses vs. Appositive Clauses

Appositive clauses look a great deal like relative clauses. Analyze the
following examples: what kind of word is the clause attached to? what is the
original sentence that the clause was created from?

#1: appositive clause: I like the idea that students can become independent
learners.
1. The clause is attached to a noun--the idea.
2. The underlying sentence is: Students can become independent learners.

#2: relative clause: Students who become independent learners can continue
to learn after they leave our classes.
1. The clause is attached to a noun--students

2. The underlying sentence is: Students become independent learners.

Based on that analysis, how are these two subordinate clause types different?
A relative clause includes in its internal structure the same noun that it attaches
to. The relative pronoun means the same thing as the noun that the clause is
attached to; the relative pronoun has a grammatical role that combines being a
connector with a role in the syntax of its clause.

An appositive clause does not include the noun that it attaches to; the
appositive clause is like a linking verb--or an equal sign: the idea = students
can become independent learners. The connector that just connects the clause
to the noun without playing any internal role in the clause.

Appositive clauses can be related to particulate verbs and their noun clause
direct objects:

I believe that students can become independent learners.

The belief that students can become independent learners is common among
teachers.

I know that students can become independent learners.

Our knowledge that students can become independent learners drives our
work.

I feel that students can become independent learners.

My feeling that students can become independent learners is shared by many
other teachers.

Grammarians and linguists refer to this process of changing a verb to a noun as

nominalization. Notice how the nominalized version has the same grammatical
feature as the verb version--the noun clause of the verb version becomes the
appositive clause of the noun version.

When analyzing authentic samples, just be careful not to jump to the

conclusion that every noun + that combination is a relative clause. Nouns like
idea, belief, thought, knowledge, and a few others are often followed by
appositive clauses.

Test your knowledge by deciding which of these sentences has an appositive

clause and which has a relative clause.

The idea that I shared with my students comes from many years of teaching
experience.

The idea that we must work together as a team guides our department's work.

Click here for my analysis.

Analyzing Authentic Examples

At the beginning of this lecture, I listed some examples from the sociology
textbook that I'm using for examples. Here's that list again. Try analyzing
these: what's the core sentence? What sentence was changed to make the
relative clause? What's the grammatical function of the relative pronoun in its
clause? Where in the sentence does the relative clause come?

Examples of Sentences with Relative Clauses

"Societies to Social Networks"
Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach
After you have completed your analysis, click here to see mine.

Please let me know your questions and/or comments. Thanks.

References

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Edinburgh Gate,
Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An

ESL/EFL teacher's course. (2nd ed.) Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Noun complement clause:

In a noun complement clause construction the complement clause occurs after a

noun. The number of nouns that can be used in this construction is limited.
Some examples are 'the fact', 'the rumor', 'the suggestion', 'the idea', etc.
(Check text for others.)

Examples: I love the idea [that chimps can talk].

The proof [that Suzie stole the cookies] is in front of you.

Notice in each of the above examples that the complement clause occurs
directly after a noun; thus they are noun complement clauses. This is the type
of complement clause that is most likely to get mixed up with relative clauses,
because this noun looks an awful lot like the head NP we discussed with
relative clauses.

How can you tell the difference? Well, in the above examples try to replace
'that' with a WH relative pronoun.

*I love the idea [which chimps can talk].

*The proof [which Suzie stole the cookies] is in front of you.

If these were relative clauses we could do this and still have good sentences
with the same meaning as the originals. Since these sentences are no longer
good sentences with the same meaning, we know that the clauses are
complement clauses rather than relative clauses.

Another thing to look at is the concept of the gap. Remember that all relative
clauses have a gap. If you remove the complementizer in the above clauses
you will see a complete sentence with no gap:

[Chimps can talk] [Suzie stole the cookies]

Thus these clauses have passed another test in favor of complement clauses.

As far as deletion is concerned, there are sources that say that in the noun
complement construction we can never delete 'that'. I think it is less common,
but I'm not sure about 'never'. What do you think of the following?

I love the idea chimps can talk.

The proof Suzie stole the cookies is in front of you.