Yimam, Baye (Phd)Amena, Asfaw2020-10-122023-11-082020-10-122023-11-081993-06http://etd.aau.edu.et/handle/123456789/22662This 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.en-USthe st ructure of relative clauses (RC ' S) 1 n Gumuz.Thesis