TEMA 26. La oracin compleja: la subordinacin (2). Oraciones adjetivas.

Tipos,
estructura y elementos constituyentes

1.- INTRODUCTION
A complex sentence contains one independent clause and at least one dependent
clause. Unlike a compound sentence, however, a complex sentence contains clauses
which are not equal. Consider the following examples:
Simple: My friend invited me to a party. I do not want to go.
Compound My friend invited me to a party, but I do not want to go.
Complex Although my friend invited me to a party, I do not want to go.
In the first example, there are two separate simple sentences: "My friend invited me to a
party" and "I do not want to go." The second example joins them together into a single
sentence with the co-ordinating conjunction "but," but both parts could still stand as
independent sentences -- they are entirely equal, and the reader cannot tell which is
most important. In the third example, however, the sentence has changed quite a bit: the
first clause, "Although my friend invited me to a party," has become incomplete, or a
dependent clause.
A complex sentence is very different from a simple sentence or a compound
sentence because it makes clear which ideas are most important. When you write
My friend invited me to a party. I do not want to go.
or even
My friend invited me to a party, but I do not want to go.
The reader will have trouble knowing which piece of information is most
important to you. When you write the subordinating conjunction "although" at the
beginning of the first clause, however, you make it clear that the fact that your friend
invited you is less important than, or subordinate, to the fact that you do not want to go.
There are different subcategories of complex sentences. I am going to
concentrate on adjectival clauses.
2. ADJECTIVAL CLAUSES: TYPES
An adjectival clause is a clause that functions as an adjective, i.e. a clause that
qualifies a noun or nominal; the position of this clause is immediately after the noun it
qualifies, which is called its antecedent. According to this definition, most grammarians
recognize the relative clauses as the only type of adjectival clauses, whether they are
unconnected or introduced by a relative pronoun or adverb:
The house I would like to buy is not for sale (unconnected).
The student who answered the question was John (rel. pronoun).
The place where I live is quite close (rel. adverb).
2

On the other hand, a few grammarians, based on the term attributive clause,
include among adjectival clauses some other types, apart from the relative clauses in
the examples above. Here are the main types:
1. There is a kind of appositive clause, introduced by that which modifies a noun; this
construction resembles a relative clause, but it differs in that the particle that has no
function in the clause structure and in that the noun modified (antecedent) is an abstract
noun such as fact, reply, remark... Like relative clauses, it may be defining and nondefining:
The fact that he wrote a letter to her is well known (defining).
This last fact, that he did not join the party, should be known (non-defining).
2. Clauses introduced by as, but, until, after an antecedent qualified by same or
such may be classed here, since they resemble relative clauses, though they also have
an adverbial character:
Do you want the same cake as you always have?
We had such grapes as you never saw.
In literary English, a noun in a negative sentence may be qualified by a kind of
adjectival clause introduced by but; the word but contradicts the negative:
There is not a man here but would like to be in your place (who would not like to be in
your place).
Before, until and some other subordinating words may introduce a clause
modifying an antecedent denoting time. This construction resembles relative clauses
introduced by relative adverbs:
The time before he arrived was spent in making preparations.
3. There is a clause having as verb one of the non-finite forms which modifies a noun in
the same ways as a relative clause modifies its antecedent. The non-finite forms used in
this way are the present participle, the past participle and sometimes the infinitive. Thus,
the following examples may be included among adjectival clauses:
The man waiting for me outside is my friend George (defining, pres. Partic.).
The only car repaired by that mechanic is mine (defining, past partic.).
This scholar, to be seen daily in the British Museum, has devoted his life to the history
of science (non-defin., infin.)
The correspondence of these examples with relative clauses can be seen from the fact
that all of them are equivalent to relative clauses by which they can be substituted.

4. Finally, one type of verbless clause is what Quirk calls supplementive adjective
clause. It consists of an adjective (sometimes with additional constituents) functioning
as a full clause:
Nervous, the man opened the letter/
The man, nervous, opened the letter/
The man opened the letter, nervous.
As the above example demonstrate, the supplementive adjective clause is mobile,
though (partly to avoid ambiguity) it usually precedes or follows the subject, as in the
second example, it is in some respects like a non-defining relative clause.
All these types of clauses can be reduced to other classes and that is the reason why
most grammarians exclude all these clauses from the adjectival type, and recognize the
relative clauses as the only genuine examples belonging to this class, as I will develop
now.
3. RELATIVE CLAUSES
Relative clauses qualify nouns or pronouns. The noun qualified is called the
antecedent and the relative clause normally follows the antecedent:
This is the house that I would like to buy.
Very often, the relative clause divides the main clause:
The house that I would like to buy is not for sale.
a) Main types of relative clauses: Relative clauses are of two types. Consider the
following examples:
I wish I knew the man who wrote that book/
The task which confronted him had to be faced alone.
My uncle, who will be seventy tomorrow, is still a keen sportsman/
Westminster Abbey, which is one of the oldest churches in Great Britain, contains the
graves of many famous Englishmen.
The former examples contain a clause restricting the reference of the antecedent
to one or more particular persons or things, and, therefore is called a restrictive or
defining clause; the latter ones contain a clause which does not restrict the reference of
the antecedent, but gives further relevant information about it; such a clause is called an
amplifying or non-defining clause.
Thus, modification can be restrictive or non restrictive. That is, the head can be
viewed as a member of a class which can be linguistically identified only through the
4

modification that has been supplied (restrictive). Or the head can be viewed as unique or
as a member of a class that has been independently identified; any modification given to
such a head is additional information which is not essential for identifying the head, and
we call it non-restrictive.
Restrictive clauses are subordinate in meaning to the clause containing the
antecedent; amplifying or non-defining clauses are more independent; their contents
might often be expressed by an independent statement. This distinction is marked by a
different in tonation, and by a clear break preceding the latter kind of clause, no such
break separating a restrictive or defining clause from its antecedent. The presence or
absence of such a pause is marked in writing and in print by the presence or absence of
a comma before as after the sub-clause. Compare some other examples:
All the books, which had pictures in them, were sent to the little girl/ (This is a nondefining clause; it means that she got all the books).
All the books which had pictures in them were sent to the little girl/ (This sentence
without commas is defining; it means that she got only those books which had pictures
in them).
He has a brother, who is an artist = (he has only one brother, and is an artist).
He has a brother who is an artist =(he may have several brothers, but one of them is
an artist).
As we can observe, it may also be pointed out that a sentence with a defining
clause contains a single statement, one with a non-defining clause containing two
statements.
b) Relative clauses as adjectives equivalents: Relative clauses are used as adjective
equivalents. They are introduced by the relative pronouns who, which, and that,
and the relative adverbs where, when, why. In other occasions, those relatives
may be dropped and then we have an unconnected (or contact) relative clause. Let us
see the use of the relatives in defining and in non-defining clauses:
1) In defining clauses that can be used as the subject for both persons and things, though
who is often preferred after people and after the pronoun those. Which is
occasionally used as the subject for things, but that is much commoner:
The boy who (that) broke the window is called John Grey.
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones (rarely that).
The house that (which) used to stand at this corner was destroyed.
2) In defining clauses that is used as the object of the verb. Which is possible for things,
but that is usually preferred. The object that, however, is usually dropped. The use

of whom for persons is comparatively rare in modern English informal style and very
rare in conversation:
The people (that) you met at my house yesterday are Moslems/ (Usually people you
met, very rarely people whom you met).
The books I lent you belong to my brother/ (Rarely the books which I lent you).
3) In defining clauses with an object that is governed by a preposition, the object, that,
is usually dropped. The preposition is placed at the end of the clause. It is possible, but
not so usual to use whom or which with the preposition preceding
This is the book I was telling you about/ (Rarely and more formal about which I was
telling you).
That man you lent your dictionary to seldom returns the books/ (More formal That
man to whom you lent your dictionary).
4) After the noun way it is usual to omit both the relative which and the preposition
in such constructions as these:
Thats not the way I do it/ (the way in which)
Thats the way the money goes.
As the examples given above show, the object of a verb or preposition in a
defining relative clause is usually omitted in speaking. The relative pronoun may also be
omitted when it is the subject of its clause, in the following cases:
-

In colloquial style after there is (was) and, it is (was):

Theres somebody at the door wants to see you.
Its an ill wind blows nobody good.

When the relative clause contains the there + to be constructions:

This is the only one there is.
These are the only good books there are on this subject.

In both examples that is omitted before there. Which is never used in such
clauses.
Whose is used as the possessive form of who with reference to persons. It is
also used instead of of which with reference to things to indicate possession:
Thats the man whose daughter John is going to marry.
The only words in this paragraph whose spelling may cause trouble are

The last example may be rewritten:

The only words in this paragraph the spelling of which../ or
The only words in this paragraph of which the spelling..
The relative adverbs where and when are often used instead of a preposition and
a relative pronoun, when the antecedent means place or time respectively:
The office in which (where) he works/
The days on which (when) you dont go to school/
The office where he works/ The days when you dont go to school.
When, in such clauses, is sometimes replaced by that. Sometimes no connecting
word is used:
The baby was taken ill the day (that) we sailed for New York.
The relative adverb why is occasionally used in a similar way. The construction
is not so common in colloquial style:
The reason for which he comes here is/
The reason why he comes her is../
The reason he comes here is../ (why is usually omitted).
5) In non-defining relative clauses the relative that is not used. Non-defining relative
clauses are not used in colloquial style and are more formal in effect. Who is used for
persons. The object form whom, rare in spoken English, is regularly used in nondefining relative clauses. Note the use of commas to enclose these non-defining clauses:
Mr Green, who gives me piano lessons, has been ill recently.
Mr Green, whom you know well, is my music teacher.
Mr Green, from whom I have piano lessons, is a good teacher.
Mr Green, from whom I have piano lessons, is a good teacher.
Which is used in non-defining clauses for things. For the possessive form, of
which is preferred to whose:
This fountain pen, which cost me thirty shillings, leaks badly.
This fountain pen, which I bought two months ago, leaks badly.
This encyclopaedia, of which the second volume (or the second volume of which) is
missing, is out of date.
7

The fountain pen, for which I paid thirty shillings, was a bad bargain.
In non-defining clauses the relative pronoun is not omitted. If the pronoun is
governed by a preposition, the preposition usually precedes. It is rarely placed in endposition (as in defining relative clauses).
Relative adverbs are also used in non-defining clauses:
Stratford-on-Avon, where Shakespeare was born, is visited by many tourists.
A non-defining relative clause may refer not to a single noun as antecedent but
to the whole of what precedes; the relative clause is always introduced by which in such
cases:
He has to work on Sundays, which he does not like.
4.APPOSITIVE CLAUSES
One remaining type of finite verb clause that plays part in postmodification
needs to be mentioned: the appositive clause. This resembles the relative clause in being
capable of introduction by that; in permitting zero, though not commonly and indeed
rarely unless the head of the antecedent phrase is the noun fact; and in distinguishing
between restrictive and non-restrictive. It differs, in that the particle that is not an
element in the clause structure as it must be in a relative clause. It differs also in that the
head of the noun phrase must be a factive abstract noun such as fact itself, proposition,
reply, remark, answer, and the like:
The belief that he was infallible is well-founded,
As with apposition generally, we can link the apposed units with be:
The belief is that no one is infallible.
Or we may replace deverbal nouns like belief by the corresponding verb plus object
clause:
He believes that no one is infallible.
Plural heads are also rare with appositive postmodification and are regarded as
unacceptable with belief, fact, possibility, etc:
*The possibilities that she was lazy and (that she) disliked school worried her mother.
With the perfectly acceptable plural head with relative clause postmodification:
The possibilities that she was now offered seemed very attractive.
Despite the restriction on the types of noun head that may be postmodified by an
appositive clause, it is natural that the superficial similarity to relative clause
postmodification can sometimes cause momentary difficulty. Total ambiguity is rare
8

since so many selectional factors have to be involved before anything like the following
can occur:
A report that he stole was ultimately sent to the police.
The two interpretations (he stole a report or the report was that he stole) depend
upon the possibility that a report can be a physical object or an abstract (that is,
nominalizing the verb report); upon steal being permissibly transitive or intransitive;
and several other factors (told in place of sent, for example, would dismiss the
ambiguity though it would not prevent the hearer or reader from having temporary
difficulty).
5. POSTMODIFICATION BY NON-FINITE CLAUSES
Postmodification of the noun phrase is possible with all three of the non-finite
clause types.
5.1 Present participle clauses
Postmodification with ing participle is fairly common. Thus we can have:
The man writing the obituary is my friend.
Where writing can be interpreted as future, simple present, present continuous, past or
past continuous.
In any case, the antecedent head corresponds to the deleted subject of the nonfinite verb clause; there is non-finite postmodifier, therefore corresponding directly to
the relative clause in:
The obituary that the man is writing..
5.2 Past participle clauses
This is also very frequent though we have to comment some things:
The only car repaired by that mechanic is mine.
This sentence is open to some tense interpretation (future, present continuous or past
continuous) but in any case it involves a passive meaning:
The only car that will be/ is (being) / was (being) repaired by that mechanic is mine.
The antecedent head is identical with the deleted subject of the ed postmodifying
clause as it is with the ing construction, but in this case the participle concerned is as
firmly linked with the passive voice as that in the ing construction is linked with the
active.

5.3 Infinitive clauses

The non-finite clause in:
The next train to arrive was from York.
Could have precisely the same meaning as the relative clause in:
The next train that arrived was from York.
But this example gives a misleading simple impression in place of the wide range of
possibilities that can be left unexplicit in the infinitive postmodifying clause.In the first
place, the antecedent need not correspond to the subject in the non-finite clause, which
may have its own separate subject introduced by the for-device:
The man for John to consult is Wilson.
Or it may have as its subject a deleted indefinite expressed neither in the antecedent nor
in the remainder of the sentence:
The man to consult is Wilson.
Where the non-finite clause has neither object (the antecedent) nor subject (indefinite)
and could be understood, according to context as (The man) that you/he, etc should
consult or that everyone should consult. Still more elliptically, the infinitive clause
may omit also an entire adjunct phrase, as in:
The time to arrive is 8 pm.
Finally, we do not include here independent relative clauses, i.e. relative clauses
without antecedents introduced by what and other relative pronouns (especially
compounds with ever since they are clauses that function as nouns, and, therefore, do
not belong to this subject.
6. CONCLUSION
This topic deals with some patterns that are both essential in a good command of
English and also quite related to Spanish. It will be our duty to deal with those specific
aspect that usually cause trouble to our students and could prevent them from acquiring
these concepts and master a good usage.

10

Bibliography
Adger, D. (2003) Core Syntax. OUP.
Chomsky, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The MIT Press.
Dik, S.C. ( 1989) The Theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The Structure of the
Clause (Functional Grammar Series 9), Dordrecht.
McArthur, T. (1998). "ADJECTIVE CLAUSE." Concise Oxford Companion to the
English Language. Encyclopedia.com.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar
of the English Language. Longman
Radford, A. (1997) Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English. CUP.
Thompson, S.A. and R.E.Longacre. (1985).Adjectival clauses. In T.Shopen
(ed.),Language typology and syntactic description.Cambridge.

11