Towards a Syntax of Two Types of Relative Clauses

This paper considers the syntax of relative clauses in Germanic and Romance languages within the framework of Chomsky\u27s (1993, 1995) Minimalist Program. Previous analyses of the syntax of the relative clauses have focused mainly on the reconstruction effects and considered the structure and derivation of relative constructions. Main approaches are concerned either (i) with Matching hypothesis together with Adjunction structure, or (ii) with Head-raising hypothesis with Complementation structure. Kayne (1994) and Bianchi (1999) argue that the reconstruction effects follow directly from Head-raising relative clauses since the head noun phrase starts out in the relative clause internal position. On the other hand, Sauerland (1998), Safir (1999) and Salzmann (2006) argue that the reconstruction effects are accounted for with a postulation of the relative clause-internal head noun phrase to be deleted at PF with Matching hypothesis. A third approach is a hybrid analysis presented by Aoun and Li (2003) and Szczegielniak (2004), who point out that that-relatives and wh-relatives differ in the availability of reconstruction and claim that Head-raising relative clauses for that-relatives and Matching relative clauses for wh-relatives are both necessary. Aoun and Li (2003) and Szczegielniak (2004) differ with regard to whether both adjunction structure and complementation structure are necessary in a particular language. In this paper, I attempt to argue that there is a correlation between the property of relative clauses (i.e., the reconstruction effects, heavy pied-piping, etc.) and the type of the relativizer employed in Germanic and Romance language. I will present a new modified hybrid analysis -- Head-raising and Matching -- which will provide a principled explanation with the correlation between the type of the relativizer and the properties of relative clauses. Furthermore, I will propose that whether the relative clause derives via Head-raising or Matching is in fact determined by the property of the type of the relativizer, concerning with the difference between internal structures of the three types of relative pronouns. In sum, once the type of the relative pronoun is determined in the language, how to derive the relative clause is automatically determined and the relative clause in that language shows (or does not show) various properties, such as heavy pied-piping and reconstruction