RELATIVE CLAUSES IN KAMMU AND THE KEENAN‐COMRIE HIERARCHY

Abstract

There are three relativization strategies in the Austroasiatic lang Kammu: (1) deletion of the relativized NP, (2) deletion & change of word order, & (3) pronominalization of the relativized NP. The use of these strategies for the six positions (subject, direct O, indirect O, oblique NP, genitive, & O of comparison) on the relativization hierarchy proposed by E. Keenan & B. Comrie (see LLBA 12/1, 7800627) was investigated, showing that strategy 1 is used for positions 1, 2, & 4, strategy 2 for positions 2 & 4, & strategy 3 for positions 3-6, against Keenan's & Comrie's claim that any relativization strategy should apply to a continuous segment of the hierarchy. One possible reason for this may be that the indirect O is marked by a postposition, an unusual construction in Kammu. There is an optional relative clause marker, whose function is to form restrictive relative clauses; relative clauses without this marker may be nonrestrictive or restrictive. Relativization of subjects by strategy 1 & of direct Os or oblique NPs by strategy 2 lead to the same surface structure of the relative clause. Despite this, the function of the relativized NP can normally be determined unambiguously by using both syntactic & pragmatic considerations. Another hierarchy (subject, direct O, oblique NP) is involved here, so that if a relative clause is syntactically ambiguous, the pragmatically possible NP which is highest on this hierarchy is chosen as the relativized NP. (Less)