Relative Clauses In Gumuz (A Gb-Approach)
No Thumbnail Available
Date
1993-06
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
AAU
Abstract
This study analyzes the st ructure of relative clauses
(RC ' S) 1 n Gumuz. It follows the theory of Government and
Binding (GB) of Chomsk y (198 1 , 1982, 1986, 1988) and other
recent developments . GB assumes that relative clauses are
non-argument clausal complements of nouns. It is claimed
th e 1 ntE,~n al st,-uc tLTe of r 21 ative c lauses al'e
e x pl a ine d in terms of 5 u btheories and principles which are
assumed t o be pl""-operties of UG.,
ThE r elat ivi zi ng strategies and relativized positions
are treated in chapter two. It is argued that Gumuz uses the
gapping (EC) strategy. This means that relativized positions
filled by phonetically real NP ' s but by an empty
category (EC) \o<Jhi ch is argued to be pro. Thi 5 is in
declar at i v e clauses. In interrogative relatives where whmovement
is involved the EC is a wh-trac e (=variable).
There are d iff erent head movements in Gumu2 relative
c la u s e s~ Since p repos ition cannot be stranded in GLimuz p
moves to V when t he prepositional o bject position is
,-e} ati \ii zed . Verbs also move to I to collect Tense and
Pgree ment f eatures and from I t hey move to C.
In Chapter three types of relative claLlses are
p l""- ese n t ed . rest ri ct i v e ~nd non-res trictive relative
clauses are discuss ed from dif ferent points of view. It is
iii
;. ..•• : .,' .• - ,-_ " '...:..: .~. ,_, '.' .... ~~,.·~_~~· .. I .~. - • • ~. t _ ..... -'----'·,.'~ ·.
argued that there is no syntactic difference between them.
Moreover, GUITIU2 has also
cl a uses . The difference
abs ence of a head noun.
headed and
between these
Finall''J'' ~ the element lintl
headless relative
is the presence or
is treated as a
comp le ~ ~ ent ize ~ base generated as h ead of comp.
Description
Keywords
the st ructure of relative clauses (RC ' S) 1 n Gumuz.