Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T19:08:37.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Amount Relatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Greg N. Carlson
Greg N. Carlson*
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is argued here that English contains a distinct class of relative clauses called amount relatives. On the surface, these are very much like restrictive relative clauses, but they have a syntax and semantics which align them more with comparatives than with restrictive relatives. By positing this new class, we can account in a general way for some apparently exceptional behavior of certain relative clauses. Issues discussed include relativization of the logical subject of a sentence which has undergone There-Insertion (such as every man there is), as well as the interaction of idiomatic expressions and relative clause formation.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , September 1977 , pp. 520 - 542
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andrews, Avery. 1975. Studies in the syntax of relative and comparative clauses. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan W. 1973. Syntax of the comparative construction in English. LI 4. 275–344.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan W. 1975. Comparative deletion and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Analysis 1. 25–74.Google Scholar
Hankamer, Jorge. 1971. Constraints on deletion in syntax. Yale dissertation.Google Scholar
Kuroda, S.-Y. 1969. English relativization and certain related problems. Modern studies in English, ed. by Reibel, D. & Schane, S., 227–46. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1970. Where do noun phrases come from? Readings in English transformational grammar, ed. by Jacobs, R. & Rosenbaum, P., 166–83. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Martin, Larry W., and Carlson, G. 1974. Relative clause formation and resumptive pronouns, MS.Google Scholar
Milsark, Gary. 1974. Existential sentences in English. MIT dissertation. [Reproduced by Indiana University Linguistics Club.]Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David. 1972. Evidence for shadow pronouns in French relativization. The Chicago Which Hunt, 73–105. Chicago: CLS.Google Scholar
Schachter, Paul. 1973. Focus and relativization. Lg. 49. 19–46.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1970. On the determiner system of NP's and AP's. MS.Google Scholar
Smith, Carlotta. 1969. Determiners and relative clauses in a generative grammar of English. Modern studies in English, ed. by Reibel, D. & Schane, S., 247–63. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Stockwell, Robert, Schachter, Paul; and Partee, B. H. 1973. The major syntactic structures of English. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, Jean Roger. 1975. French relative clauses. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar