<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>Dear Philippe and Juergen,<br><br></div>I will first quickly respond about the examples in the last email, based on whether or not there is an adverbial making the relationship explicit. I see no difference in acceptability at all. But it does seem to flow more naturally with the adverb there. It's not a problem to leave that implicit, but certainly makes sense to add it. So I agree with the point of the argument although those minimal pairs do not demonstrate it as a contrast in acceptability per se.<br><br></div>More generally, this discussion has made me think of a related phenomenon, sort of from the opposite perspective.<br><br></div>My research focuses on pseudocoordination, especially of the verb-and-verb type like English "go and get" or "try and do". In these cases we see a subordinate-type relationship developing out of an apparently coordinated structure. Diachronically we can define this as the word AND grammaticalizing with new functions, beyond just normal coordination.<br><br></div>Although it is not the focus of my research and seems relatively rare cross-linguistically, there are attested examples where AND grammaticalizes as a relative clause marker. I briefly mentioned this type based on an example from Fijian in a conference handout here, in the context of a typology of pseudocoordination:<br><a href="http://publish.illinois.edu/djross3/files/2014/05/Ross2014_Lisbon.pdf" target="_blank">http://publish.illinois.edu/<wbr>djross3/files/2014/05/<wbr>Ross2014_Lisbon.pdf</a><br></div>(See page 4, column 1 for the Fijian example and references, also mentioned on page 6 in the list of pseudocoordination types. Unfortunately this discussion was removed from the published paper due to limited space.)<br><br></div><div>Old High Fijian (Milner 1956: 35, cf. Dixon 1988: 252)<br></div>na waqa ka yali mai a koro<br></div><div>the boat and missing from the village<br></div>'the boat which was missing from the village'<br><br></div><div>In Páez, relative clauses are formed as coordinate clauses, but the particular conjunction varies based on the switch-reference system (Slocum 1986:145).<br></div><div><br></div><div>In Kenyang, nɛ́ is multifunctional morpheme that is used as a coordinator, relativizer and other (Tabe & Atindogbé 2017:104-5). (For the same marker as a clausal coordinator see for example Seguin 1998:58.)<br></div><div><br></div>In Degema, the relative linker is nụ́, which differs from the nominal coordinating conjunction nụ only in tone (Kari 1997:52-3), so I wonder about a diachronic connection. In Hausa, the comitative dà which is used for nominal coordination is also used to mark relative clauses (Newman 2000:532).<br><br></div>These are only a few examples I've collected that suggest a (rare) cross-linguistic grammaticalization path, which in turn may suggest a functional relationship between coordination and relativization in terms of information structure for example. Juergen's comments at the beginning of this discussion (and the various replies) seem to be the relevant other side of this relationship.<br><br></div>There are also instances where the grammaticalization is not complete and the reading seems to be pragmatic, based on a coordinate construction. One particularly clear example is described for !Xun by Heine & König (2013, in the Khoesan languages volume), where the conjunction *tè 'and' "is by far the most frequently used conjunction ... and the one expressing the widest range of funcutions. In addition to marking consecutive (and simultaneous) events, it may also signal subordinate functions such as introducing temporal, adversative, reason, manner and other clauses .... In some uses, *té may even express the notion of a relative clause...":<br><br>Mā kē cŋ́ dāʼbā tà yà tci.<br></div><div>1SG PAST see child and N1 come<br></div><div>'I saw a child who is coming.'<br><br></div>I have seen other similar examples elsewhere but don't have them available at the moment. (I would of course be interested in references to similar examples if anyone is aware of them, or feel free to email me if you'd like to discuss pseudocoordination in general and compare notes about the extensive bibliography I've collected or suggest new references for me.)<br><br></div><div>Juergen, regarding your original question in general, I'm wondering if you are asking about a grammatical or pragmatic distinction (or both/either). Do you expect to find different grammatical encoding for these functions? I don't really see that for English, and then for another language where this is such a distinction, I wonder if the new type you're asking about would be considered a "relative clause" in the traditional sense. But as a pragmatic reading for relative clauses, I imagine this would be quite widespread, and then like pseudocoordination there might be a next step (e.g., 'pseudorelativization' in a parallel sense) where it is no longer relativization at all. (The term "pseudosubordination" is sometimes used for, e.g., clause-chaining constructions that have coordinate readings, the inverse of pseudocoordination where formally coordinated clauses have subordinate readings. All of these interesting represent intersecting paths of grammaticalization, potentially even going back and forth if given enough time, rather than the often proposed unidirectional paths for certain constructions.)<br></div><div><br></div><div>Thank you for an interesting discussion!<br></div><div><br></div>Daniel Ross<br></div>PhD Candidate<br></div>University of Illinois<br><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Philippe Bourdin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pbourdin@yorku.ca" target="_blank">pbourdin@yorku.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Dear Juergen,</p>
<p>To stick to English and to paraphrase you, it seems to me that
when the antecedent is a participant of the matrix event, there
are a couple of routinized lexical devices specialized in making
the event relation explicit:<br>
</p>
<p>(1a) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd, who proceeded </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. </i></p>
<p>(1b) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd, who went on </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. </i></p>
<p>Intuitively, what's distinctive about such devices is that they
seem to have a very special affinity with this type of relative
clause — a property that run-of-the-mill adverbs such as <i>immediately</i>
or <i>then</i> may not have, at least not to the same extent. <br>
</p>
<p>Let me pursue the same thread a little bit. I'm not a native
speaker of English, but my sense is that there may well be a
slight difference in acceptability between (2a) and (2b) and
between (3a) and (3b):</p>
<p>(2a) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd. He then proceeded </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. <br>
</i></p>
<p>(2b) (?) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd. He proceeded </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. <br>
</i></p>
<p>(3a) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd. He then went on </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. <br>
</i></p>
<p>(3b) (?) <i>Sally gave the cup to Floyd. He went on </i><i>to
smash it to pieces. </i></p>
<p>It's as if, to borrow Anna's term, the relative pronoun in (1a)
and (1b) exerted all by itself sufficient cohesive force to
license <i>proceeded</i> and <i>went on</i>. When you change the
hypotactic relation into a paratactic one, it might be a bit more
natural to insert a cohesive prop, i.e. <i>then</i> (or <i>immediately</i>).
But that's a just a hunch and I stand to be corrected by native
speakers as to the difference in acceptability, which is
admittedly very slight. <br>
</p>
<p>In any event, if <i>proceed </i>and <i>go on </i>do have the
function I'm attributing to them, this would nicely bring symmetry
into the system you propose, at least for English.<br>
</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>Philippe<br>
</p>
<pre class="m_6800873666212361045moz-signature" cols="72">---
Philippe Bourdin
Professeur agrégé / Associate professor
Département d'études françaises
et Programme de linguistique
Bureau YH 264
Collège Glendon / York University
2275 Bayview Avenue
Toronto, ON, Canada M4N 3M6</pre><div><div class="h5">
<br>
<div class="m_6800873666212361045moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-05-09 10:38 AM, Giacalone Ramat
Anna wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear Juergen,
<div>in my paper "Persistence and renewal in the relative
pronoun paradigm: the case of Italian", Folia Linguistica
Historica 26, 2005, 115-138, I discuss narrative relative
clauses and their function in Old Italian. I suggest that the
emergence and diffusion of relative pronoun <i>il quale</i>
in Old Italian was modeled on the Latin "connecting relative"
(Rosén) or relativischer Anschluss (Lehmann) . It was used as
a device to enhance text cohesion..</div>
<div>Best</div>
<div>Anna</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="m_6800873666212361045gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Anna Giacalone Ramat
<div>Professor Emerita of Linguistics</div>
<div>The University of Pavia </div>
<div>Academia Europaea</div>
<div>Honorary Member of the Societas Linguistica
Europaea</div>
<div><br>
Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici<br>
Strada Nuova 65<br>
I-27100-Pavia<br>
tel. +39 0382 984486<br>
email: <a href="mailto:annaram@univ.it" target="_blank">annaram@unipv.it</a><br>
<a href="https://www.academia.edu/34500598/CV_CURR" target="_blank">https://www.academia.edu/<wbr>34500598/CV_CURR</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2018-05-08 21:10 GMT+02:00 Bohnemeyer,
Juergen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" target="_blank">jb77@buffalo.edu</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear
colleagues -- I’m looking for any leads regarding both
in-depth single-language and typological studies on a
phenomenon one might refer to under the makeshift labels
‘narrative relative clauses’ or ‘eventive relative clauses’.
I will stick here to the former label (NRCs), since the
latter is more ambiguous. NRCs are a type of non-restrictive
RCs that distinguish themselves from other kinds of
non-restrictive RCs by standing in a narrative rhetorical
relation to the matrix clause (or put differently, by
advancing a narrative story line to which the matrix clause
also contributes). Based on European languages, some
subtypes could be distinguished based on (i) the
“antecedent” of the RC - the matrix clause referent the RC
picks up - and (ii) the expression of the semantic relation
between the matrix and RC events:<br>
<br>
• Antecedent is a participant of the matrix event;
event relation implicit:<br>
Sally gave the cup to Floyd, who smashed it to
pieces<br>
• Antecedent is the matrix event itself; event
relation implicit:<br>
Sally gave the cup to Floyd, which irritated Sam<br>
• Antecedent is the matrix event itself; event
relation explicit:<br>
Sally gave the cup to Floyd, whereupon Sam left
the room in disgust<br>
<br>
B and C are presumably structurally distinct from ordinary
(non-restrictive) RCs. On the other hand, A-type NRCs are
interesting for the form-meaning mismatch or
semantic-pragmatic mismatch they involve. A more technical
definition of NRCs might be as follows:<br>
<br>
• Constructions involving a matrix clause and a
dependent clause;<br>
• The dependent clause should share some of the
language-specific properties of RCs that set them apart from
other types of dependent clauses/predications in the
particular languages;<br>
• The matrix clause event and the dependent clause
event are causally related and/or spatio-temporally
contiguous.<br>
<br>
I fully expect that the pragmatic functions of NRCs can be
partially or wholly fulfilled by other clause combination
constructions that do not have the language-specific
trappings of RCs. Such functionally related alternative
means are very much part of the interest driving this
investigation.<br>
<br>
Thank you in advance for any leads on this topic! -- Best —
Juergen<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Juergen Bohnemeyer, Associate Professor and Director of
Graduate Studies <br>
Department of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science <br>
University at Buffalo <br>
<br>
Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus * Mailing address:
609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260 <br>
Phone: (716) 645 0127 <br>
Fax: (716) 645 3825 * Email: <a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" target="_blank">jb77@buffalo.edu</a> * Web:
<a href="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/%7Ejb77/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~j<wbr>b77/</a>
<br>
<br>
Office hours Tu 2-3:20 /Th 2:30-3:20<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.o<wbr>rg/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="m_6800873666212361045mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>______________________________<wbr>_________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="m_6800873666212361045moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a>
<a class="m_6800873666212361045moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>