ON GAPLESS RELATIVE CLAUSES IN CHINESE∗
Hui-Chin Joyce TsaiNational Tsing Hua University

1.

Introduction

This paper discusses the so called “gapless relative constructions” in Chinese. 1
Previous studies tend to assume that gapless relative clauses as one type of relative clauses,
and thus provide unify analysis (cf. Tsai 1997, Ning 1993). Yet, it requires extra
language-specific stipulations. Also, empirically, those unify theories are not without
counterexamples. We thus argue that gapless relative clauses are not true relative clauses, andthey should be analyzed as complex noun phrases parallel with simple noun phrases. That is,gapless relative clauses have clausal modifiers; while simple noun phrases have adjectival
modifiers. This proposal is further supported by the apparent relatives in Japanese (cf.
Murasugi 1991).
Our argumentation is organized as follows: Section 2 is the introduction of the propertiesof gapless relative clauses. We first argue that the tests for distinguishing gapless relative
constructions and regular ones in Korean are not viable in Chinese (cf. Cha 1998, Zhang
2007). Section 3 is the review of Tsai’s (1997) and Ning’s (1993) arguments: gaplessconstructions as one type of relative clauses. Then we propose that gapless relative
constructions cannot be deemed as true relatives. This kind of analysis is substantiated by the
discussions in Japanese in Section 4. Murasugi (1991) argues that relative constructions arecomplex noun phrases in Japanese. Finally, this paper is concluded in section 5.
2.

Properties of Gapless Relative Constructions in Chinese

Since Tang (1979), many linguists have discussed the syntactic and semantic propertiesof special relative constructions --- gapless relative clauses --- which are absent in English.
Yet, it is still controversial whether “gapless relative constructions” are really relative clauses.
In this section, we review Zhang’s (2007) arguments. She treats gapless relative constructions
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Siena-Tsinghua-Nanzan Joint Workshop on
Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition held at Nanzan University, February 2-3, 2008. I would
like to express my gratitude to the audience, and in particular I would like to thank Mamoru Saito,
Keiko Murasugi, Yasuaki Abe, Jonah Lin, Hiroshi Aoyagi, for the comments and discussions. Allerrors are my own alone.
∗1

The term of “gapless relative constructions” is embraced with the quotation mark because theauthor thinks that this kind of construction is not relative clause.
Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 5, 109-124© 2008 Hui-Chin Joyce TsaiNanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5

as one kind of relative clauses in Chinese.
2.1.

Distinctions between Gapless Relative Clauses and Regular Relative Ones

Zhang (2007) proposes that gapless relative constructions are indeed distinct from
regular relative clauses and noun-complement constructions. She claims that the head nounsof gapless relative constructions are relational nouns, and the clauses are their licensors.
Syntactically, the head nouns are predicates and the clauses are subjects. Compare to regular
relative constructions, gapless relative constructions denote a reversed predication relation
between the head nouns and the clauses.
Zhang (2007) following Cha (1998, 1999) suggests that gapless relative clauses differ
from regular ones in the following ways:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.

Gapless relative clauses indeed have no gaps.
The heads of gapless relative clauses must be relational.
The adnominal clauses of gapless relative clauses are not optional.
Gapless relative clauses may not be conjoined with the regular relative clauses.
Gapless relative clauses may not be stacked, but the regular relative clauses may.

First, it is true by the name of “gapless” that there is indeed no gap in “gapless relative
clauses”, since the argument structure of play has been fulfilled, as shown by (1).2(1)

張三彈鋼琴的聲音

Zhangsan tan gangqin de shengyin
Zhangsan play piano DE sound‘the sound of Zhangsan’s playing piano’
Second, Zhang (2007) following Huang et al. (2000) claims that the head nouns ofgapless relative clauses must be relational, while it is not the case for regular relative clauses,
as shown by the contrast between (2) and (3):(2)

炒菜的那個人chao caide na
fry vegetable DE thatge renCL person‘the person who fried vegetables’

2

Abbreviations used in this paper include: ASP: aspect markers; DE: verbal suffix or marker for
modifying phrases like genitive phrases, relative clauses, and noun complement clauses; RC: relative
clause.

-110-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)(3)* 媽媽炒菜的那個人
mama chao caide na -ge ren
mom fry vegetables DE that-CL person
Intended: ‘the person for whom Mom fried vegetables’

The head noun ren ‘person’ in (3) is not a relational noun, yielding the ungrammaticality ofthe sentence. However, this may not be the case. The head noun bisai ‘games’ of regular
relative clause is a relational noun, but this does not make the sentence ungrammatical, as in
(4).
(4)

[張三參加 ti]的比賽 i 很多
[Zhangsan canjia ti] de bisai i hen duo
Zhangsan attend
de games very many
‘games which Zhangsan attend are a lot’

Third, Zhang (2007) argues that the optionality of the adnominal clauses candifferentiate gapless relative clauses from regular ones, as shown by (5)-(6).
(5)

他不喜歡(我買的)手機 (regular RC)

Ta bu xihuan (wo mai de) shouji
He not likeI buy DE cell phone‘He does not like the cell phone that I bought.’(6)

他不喜歡(*我炒菜的)味道 (gapless RC)

Ta bu xihuan (*wo chao caide) weidao
He not likeI
fry vegetables DE smell‘He does not like the smell of my frying vegetables.’With careful scrutiny, gapless relative clause remains grammatical even if the clause isdeleted, as in (7).
(7)

張三沒聽到(李四彈鋼琴的)聲音

Zhangsan mei tingdao (Lisi tan gangqin de) shengyin
Zhangsan not hear
Lisi play piano
DE sound‘Zhangsan does not hear the sound of Lisi’s playing piano.’
Fourth, with regard to the case of coordination, generally, the semantic type of conjuncts
should be of the same. Thus, Zhang (2007) attributes the ungrammaticalities of (8) to theeffects that different types of relative clauses can not be coordinated. Namely, the regular
relative clause the vegetables that Lisi bought cannot be conjoined with the gapless relative
clauses the smell of his cooking. Besides, different types of heads of relative clauses cannot be
conjoined, either. Thus, the gapless relative head noun cannot be coordinated with the regular-111-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5

relative head noun, as shown by the contrast between (9)-(11).
(8) *[我感覺到了[[露露買的菜] 和[他炒菜的] 味道 (*regular RC &gapless RC)*Wo ganjuedao-le [[Lulu mai de cai]he [ta chao caide weidao]]I
fell-ASP[[Lulu buy DE vegetable] and [he fry vegetable DE smell](9)*張三散步的[後果和時間]*Zhangsan sanbu de [houguo
he shijian]Zhangsan walk DE [consequence and time](10)

張三常常散步的[時間和地方]

Zhangsan changchang sanbu de [shijian
Zhangsan often
walk DE [timehe defang]
and place]‘the time when and the place where Zhangsan often takes a walk’(11)他做惡的[代價和後果]Ta zuo-e de [daijia he houguo]
He do-evil DE [price and consequence]‘the price and the consequence for his evil-doing’
Yet, sentence (12) where regular relative clause is conjoined with gapless relative clause will
challenge Zhang’s (2007) analysis.
(12)

張三同時聞到[媽媽炒菜的]跟[他最懷念的]味道 (gapless & regular RC)

Zhangsan tongshi
wendao [mama chao caide] gen [ta zui
Zhangsan simultaneously smell [Mom fry vegetable DE] and [he mosthuainian de] weidao
missDE] smell‘Zhangsan simultaneously smells the smell of Mom’s frying vegetables and also what
he misses.’
There is also an alternative way to explain the ungrammaticalities of (8) and (9). They can be
ascribed to semantically anomaly. In (8), it is reasonable for the smell of the cooking to be felt,
but it is weird for the relative clause the vegetable that Lisi bought to be felt. Also,
coordination construction requires the two conjuncts to be semantically relevant. In (9) it isthus inappropriate to conjoin the consequence of walk and the time of walk. For (10) and (11),Zhang (2007) does not rule out the possibility of noun phrase coordination. That is, the twohead nouns in either (10) or (11) are the result of coordination, and have nothing to do withthe types of relatives which they belong to.
Besides, it is noticeable that [XP de [NP1+NP2]] is not necessarily equal to [[XP deNP1]+ [XP de NP2]]. This is further validated by the false predication that (13) entails (14).

-112-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)(13)

張三和李四在公園裡見面

Zhangsan he Lisi zai gongyuan li
jianmianZhangsan and Lisi at park
inside meet
‘Zhangsan and Lisi met in the park.’(14) *張三在公園裡見面和李四在公園裡見面*Zhangsan zai gongyuan li
jianmian he Lisi zai gongyuan li
jianmianZhangsan at park
inside meetand Lisi at park
inside meet‘*Zhangsan met in the park and Lisi met in the park.’
It is clear that the collective predicate jianmian ‘meet’ requires the plural nominal; thus, (14)is ungrammatical.
Last, Zhang (2007) tries to mark the boundaries of regular clause and gapless relative
clause by the properties of stacking. Namely, regular clause may be stacked; whereas gapless
relative clause may not, as seen by the contrast between (15) and (16).
(15)

媽媽炒的李四洗的菜

Mama chao de Lisi xi
de caiMom fry DE Lisi wash DE vegetables‘the vegetables that are washed by Lisi are fried by Mom ’(16) * 媽媽炒菜的李四洗菜的聲音* Mama chao caide Lisi xi
caide shengyin
Mom fry vegetables DE Lisi wash vegetables DE soundHowever, this test is invalid by the following reason. McCawley (1988) argues that restrictive
relative clauses can be stacked but nonrestrictive relatives cannot; however, Vries (2000)
finds that nonrestrictive relative clauses can be stacked in Dutch, but such examples are rare.
This indicates that whether the relative clause can be stacked or not is not a universal property,
and it may neither be appropriate evidence to support that gapless relative clauses are distinct
from regular relative clauses.
2.2.

Distinctions between Gapless Relative Clauses and Noun-Complement
Constructions

Zhang (2007) argues that gapless relative constructions behave differently from thenoun-complement constructions: (i) the occurrence of evaluative adverbs; (ii) coordinationand (iii) accommodation of the animate adnominal. First, Zhang (2007) proposes that anevaluative adverb is not allowed in gapless relative constructions, but it is allowed innoun-complement constructions, as shown by the pairing in (17) and (18). Yet, theungrammaticality of (19) shows that evaluative adverbs are also excluded from regular
relative clauses.

-113-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5(17) *我聞到了[李四居然煮飯的味道] (gapless RC)*Wo wendao-le [Lisi juran
zhu-fan de weidao]Ismell-ASP Lisi unexpectedly cook -rice DE smell
Intended:‘I smelled the smell of Lisi’s unexpectedly cooking.’(18)

我聽說了[李四居然搶了銀行的報導] (noun-complement)

Wo tingshuo-le [Lisi juran
qiang-le yinhang de baodao]
Ihear-ASP
Lisi unexpectedly rob-ASP bank
DE report‘I heard the report that Lisi unexpectedly robbed a bank.’(19) *張三聽說了[李四居然賣房子的消息] (noun-complement)*Zhangsan tingshuo-le [Lisi juran
mai fangzi de xiaoxi]
Zhangsan hear-ASP
Lisi unexpectedly sell house DE news
‘Zhangsan heard the news that Lisi unexpectedly sold his house.’
It is known that evaluative adverbs are unlikely to be embedded in the adnominal sentences.
According to the syntactic analysis of adverbs by Cinque (1999), speaker-oriented adverbs,
such as the evaluative adverbs are placed in relatively high position in sentences. In addition,
we do not share the same intuition with Zhang in (18), and the grammaticality of this sentence
is quite low.
Second, Zhang (2007) argues that gapless relative constructions cannot conjoin with anoun-complement constructions; thus, (20) is ungrammatical.
(20) *[橡皮燃燒的味道]和[那種氣體沒有毒的謠言]*[xiangpi ranshao de weidao] he [na zhong qiti meiyou dude yaoyan]
Rubber burnDE smell and that kind air not-have poison DE rumor
In fact, the above sentence can be rescued by the insertion of certain information, as seen in(21). Another coordinator erqie ‘and’ is used to link clausal conjuncts, and the additive
predicate scare everyone make the two conjuncts, the smell of the rubber’s burning and therumor that the air is poison relevant.
(21) [橡皮燃燒的味道]而且[那種氣體有毒的謠言]嚇壞了大家[xiangpi ranshao de weidao] erqie [na zhaong qiti you dudeRubber burnDE smell and that kind
air have poison DE
yaoyan] xiahuai-le dajia
rumor scare-ASP everyone‘The smell of the rubber’s burning and the rumor that the air is poison scare everyone.’
Third, according to Zhang (2007), an adnominal may occur to the left of a noun-complement
construction, with an agent reading, whereas no such an adnominal may occur to the left ofgapless relative constructions, illustrating by the contrast between (22) and (23).

-114-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)(22)

露露的寶玉發表了論文的謠言

Lulu de Baoyu fabia-le
lunwen de yaoyan
Lulu DE Baoyu publish-ASP article DE rumor‘Lulu’s rumor that Baoyu published an article’(23) *露露的寶玉彈鋼琴的聲音*Lulu de Baoyu tan gangqin de shengyin
Lulu DE Baoyu play piano
DE soundObviously, this analysis is challenged by (24) where the agent 張三 ‘Zhangsan’ can precede
the gapless constructions.
(24)

張三(所)看見的李四做惡的後果

Zhangsan (suo) kanjian de Lisi zuo-e de houguo
Zhangsan (suo) see
DE Lisi do-evil DE result‘Zhangsan saw the result of Lisi’s evil-doing.’
From the above discussions, the tests provided by Cha (1998) and Zhang (2007) for
distinguishing gapless relative clauses from normal ones are not viable in Chinese. Next
chapter, we will review previous studies about gapless relatives clauses and then provide ouranalysis.
3.

Analysis

In terms of previous studies, gapless relative clauses are assumed to be a subpart ofnormal relative clauses. To provide an unify analysis, researchers have to stipulate extra
language- specific requirements exclusively for gapless relative clauses to lump them together
with the phenomenon of normal relative clauses (cf. Huang (1982), Tsai (1997), and Ning
(1993). In what follows, we will introduce Tsai’s (1997) implicit event argument analysis andalso Ning’s (1993) VP adjunct analysis.
3.1.

Tsai’s (1997) Implicit Event Argument Analysis

Tsai (1997) observes that gapless relative clauses are typically relevant with actions or
events, as shown by the ungrammaticality of stative predicate in (25) and (26).
(25) *張三(很)固執的下場很慘*Zhangsan (hen) guzhi
de xiachang hen can
Zhangsan (very) stubborn DE result
very miserable‘The result of Zhangsan’s stubbornness is very miserable.’-115-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5(26) *張三(很)聰明的好處很多*Zhangsan (hen) congming de haochu
hen duoZhangsan (very) smart
DE advantage very many
‘The advantages of John’s cleverness are a lot.’
Thus, Tsai (1997) proposes that it is an implicit event argument that is relativized. However, it
is interesting that if certain degree adverbs or negative adverbs are added, sentences turn out
to be grammatical. Consider (27) and (28).
(27)

張三(之前)太固執的下場是損失慘重Zhangsan (zhiqian) tai guzhi
de xiachang shi sunshi canzhong
Zhangsan (before) too stubborn DE result
is loss miserable‘The result of Zhangsan’s stubbornness was having terrible loss.’(28)

張三不誠實的結果很慘

Zhangsan bu chengshi de gieguo hen can
Zhangsan not honest DE result very miserable‘The result of Zhangsan’s cheating is very miserable.’Also, it is not the case that every eventive predicate can form gapless relative clauses, asin (29)-(30).
(29) *張三寫作業的好處很多*Zhangsan xia zuoyede haochu
hen duoZhangsan write homework DE advantages very many
‘The advantages of Zhangsan’s writing homework are a lot.’(30) *張三吃青菜的結果很棒
*Zhangsan chi qingcai
de jieguo
Zhangsan eat vegetables DE result

hen bangvery wonderful‘The result of Zhangsan’s eating vegetables is wonderful.’
To sum up, if more empirical data are taken into consideration, the proposal that the implicit
event argument bound by the base-generated null operator cannot be substantiated.
3.2.

Ning’s (1993) VP Adjunct Analysis

According to Ning (1993), the domain of the adjunct gap should be within four types<LOCATION>, <TIME>, <MANNER>/<INSTRUMENT> and <REASON>. The gapless
relative clauses, however, do not follow this pattern, he thus proposes VP adjunct relative
analysis. This type of adjuncts with which the NP head can associate must have the general-116-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)meaning of dedao “obtain”, as shown in (32), (34) and (36). 3(31)

他唱歌的聲音Ta chang ge
de shengyin
He sing song DE sound‘the sound of his singing’(32)

他唱歌發出了聲音[Ta [VP [V’ chang ge] [VP [V fachu
leshengyin]]]]Hesing songproduce ASP voice‘the voice is obtained from his singing.’(33)

他救人的回報Ta jiu rende huibao
He save people DE reward‘the reward of his saving people’(34)

他救人得到了回報[Ta [VP [V’ jiu ren] [VP [V dedao lehuibao]]]]Hesave people
obtain ASP reward‘He saved the people and obtained the reward.’(35)

他殺人的下場Ta sha rende xiachang
He kill people DE consequence‘the consequence of his killing people’(36)

他殺人得到了可恥的下場[Ta [VP [V’ sha ren] [VP [V dedao lekechi-dexiachang]]]]Hekill people
obtain ASP ignominious-DE consequence‘He killed the man and obtained his ignominious consequence.’
Simply put, gapless relative clauses (31), (33), and (35) can be reinterpreted as (32), (34) and(36), respectively with the verb of “obtain”. Ning (1993) further argues that if the verb does
not have the meaning of “obtain”, the relativization will be implausible, as illustrated by theungrammaticalities of (38) and (40).

3Translations of (32), (34) and (36) are revised slightly by us. Also, sentences (31), (33) and (35) areprovided by us for ease of exposition. If (32), (34) and (36) are relativized, they would be (31), (33)
and (35), respectively. The distinctions of English translations should be neglected.

-117-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5

(37)

他賣車還帳

Ta mai che huan zhang
He sell car pay bill
‘He sold his car to pay the bill.’(38) *他賣車的帳*[Ta mai che de] zhang
He sell car DE bill
[Intended] ‘The bill he (paid) by selling his car.’(39)

他唱歌哄孩子Ta chang gehong haizi
He sing song lull baby
‘He sang to lull the baby.’(40) *他唱歌的那個孩子*[Ta chang gede] na-ge haizi
He sing song DE that
baby
[Intended] ‘the baby he sang’
However insightful Ning’s (1993) VP adjunct analysis is, it runs into empiricaldifficulties. Consider (41)-(43).
(41)

張三買書的預算

Zhangsan mai shu de yusuan
Zhangsan buy book DE budget‘the budget of Zhangsan’s buying books’(42)

張三處理事情的效率

Zhangsan chuli
shiqin de xiaolu
Zhangsan deal with things DE efficiency‘the efficiency of Zhangsan’s dealing with things’(43)

張三追求真理的精神

Zhangsan zhuiqiu zhenli de jingshen
Zhangsan pursue truth DE spirit‘the spirit of Zhangsan’s pursuing truth’
From the above empirical data, it is not reasonable to paraphrase the above sentences with theverb interpreting “obtain”. Thus, the VP adjunct analysis can not be justified. In what follows,
our analysis is proposed.

-118-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)

3.3.

Our Proposal

In terms of analysis proposed by Tsai (1997) and Ning (1993), they both assimilate
gapless relative clauses with the normal ones. Yet, the unify analysis runs into empiricaldifficulties. As the above discussions have shown, some counterexamples have been
provided.
In this way, we argue that gapless relative clauses are not true relative clauses. Instead,they are complex noun phrases with adnominal clauses. This parallels with structures ofsimple noun phrases. They only differ in the following way: gapless relative clauses withclausal modifiers; simple noun phrases with adjectival modifiers. Consider the following
pairs.
(44)

張三買書的預算

Zhangsan mai shu de yusuan
Zhangsan buy book DE budget‘the budget of Zhangsan’s buying books’
(45)

玻璃的花瓶

boli de huaping
glass DE vase‘a vase made of glass’
Simply put, the clausal modifier and the adjectival modifier both restrict the domain of thehead noun. To phrase it differently, in (44) the clausal modifier tells us that the budget is only
for Zhangsan’s buying books, but not for any other purposes. Similarly, in (45) the adjectival
phrase reveals that the vase is made of glass but not of other materials.
An important question begged by this analysis is what differentiates gapless relative
clauses from noun complement constructions. In terms of ellipsis structures, both gapless
relative clauses and noun complement constructions are grammatical, as shown by (46) and
(47).
(46)

張三作弊的下場很慘，李四也是/一樣Zhangsan zuobi de xiachang hen can,Lisi ye shi/yiyang
Zhangsan cheat DE result
very miserable Lisi also is/the same
‘The result of Zhangsan’s cheating is miserable, and so does Lisi’s.’-119-Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5(47)

張三作弊的謠言令人驚訝，李四也是/一樣Zhangsan zuobi de yaoyan ling renjingya, Lisi ye
shi/yiyang
Zhangsan cheat DE rumor make people surprise Lisi also is/the same
‘The rumor of Zhangsan’s cheating is surprising, and the rumor of Lisi’s cheating is,too.’With further scrutiny, the comparative construction of bi ‘than’ can distinguish gapless
relative clauses from noun complement constructions, as seen in the pairings in (48) and (49).
(48)

張三作弊的下場比李四慘Zhangsan zuobi de xiachang bi
Lisi canZhangsan cheat DE result
than Lisi miserable‘The result of Zhangsan’s cheating is more miserable than Lisi’s.’(49) * 張三作弊的謠言比李四更令人驚訝
* Zhangsan zuobi de yaoyan bi
Lisi geng ling renjingyaZhangsan cheat DE rumor than Lisi more make people surprise‘The rumor of Zhangsan’s cheating is more surprising than the rumor of Lisi’s
cheating.’
The bi ‘than’ construction highlights the distinction between gapless relative clauses and noun
complement constructions. Namely, the adnominal clauses in the former is an adjunct but inthe latter is a complement. Thus, the noun complement cannot be torn apart and elided in (49).
One may ask why the two constructions pattern differently in bi ‘than’ structure. We only
provide empirical data, but with no proper explanation. We leave this for further research.
In this section, we propose that gapless relative clauses do not belong to relative clauses.
They are more like complex noun phrases with adjunct sentential modifiers. Furthermore, thisanalysis can be supported by the case that Japanese also allows similar construals in NP
structures (cf. Murasugi 1991).
4.

Japanese Relative Constructions

In this section, certain basic properties of Japanese relative clauses are introduced. Wethen illustrate Murasugi’s (2000) hypothesis which provide well explanation for Chinesegapless relative clauses.
4.1.

Properties of Japanese Relative Clauses

According to Kuno (1973), Japanese relative clauses do not contain a gap as shown in(50), and also do not observe subjacency effects, as illustrated in (51).

-120-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)(50)[NP[IP syuusyoku-ga
muzukasii][NP buturigaku]]
getting job-NOM is-hardphysics‘physics, which is hard to get a job in’(51)[NP[IP [NP[IP ei ej kiteiru]
yoohukuj]-ga yogoreteiru] [NP sinsiii]]
is-wearing suit -NOM is-dirty
gentleman‘the gentleman who [the suit that he is wearing] is dirty’

On the basis of Hoji (1985), Japanese relative clauses cannot involve movement, and thestraightforward hypothesis is that Japanese relative clauses are IPs rather than CPs. If they do
not have a [Spec, CP] position for the relative operator to move to, they cannot be derived by
movement. Along the same line, Murasugi (1991) provides evidence from the view oflanguage acquisition. Some Japanese-speaking children, around the age 2 to 4, produce
ungrammatical relative clauses, such as (52).
(52) * buta san-ga tataiteru no taiko
piggy-NOM is-hitting no drum
‘the drum that the piggy is playing’
Simply put, the particle no following the relative clause is not allowed in adult grammar.
Murasugi (1991) thus argues that no is of the category C. Japanese speaking children initiallyhypothesize that a Japanese relative clause is a CP, and hence, produce no in its head position.
When children grow up, they eventually discover that Japanese relative clauses are IP, andthus, cease to produce no. The positive evidence comes from the cases that overt
complementizers are not allowed in Japanese pure complex NPs in (53)-(54).
(53)[NP[IP sakana-ga yakeru] nioi]
fish-NOM burnsmell‘the smell that a fish burns’(Lit.)(54)[NP[IP doa-ga
simaru] oto]door-NOM shutsound‘the sound that a door shuts’ (Lit.)

Next section, we introduce evidence provided by Murasugi (1991) that Japanese relative
clauses are complex noun phrases.
4.2.

Relative Constructions are Complex Noun Phrases in Japanese

Murasugi (1991) shows that Japanese relatives are virtually indistinguishable fromsentential modifiers in pure complex NPs; that is, Japanese relatives are not relatives but puresentential modifiers on independent grounds. First, Japanese allows relative clauses without-121-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5

gaps, as in (50) which is repeated in (55) (cf. Kuno 1973).
(55)[NP[IP syuusyoku-ga
muzukasii][NP buturigaku]]
getting job-NOM is-hardphysics‘physics, which is hard to get a job in’

Also, many other kinds of Japanese relatives do not have counterparts in English. For
example, the head noun is ‘half’, and the whole complex NP means “half of the thingobtained by boiling potatoes”; namely, sentence (56) refers to an amount instead of a thing.
(56)[NP[IP zyagaimo-o yudeta] mono]
Potato-ACC boild thing‘the thing that resulted from boiling potatoes = boiled potatoes’

Third, in general, the modification relation between the relative clause and the head noun isvery loose in Japanese. Namely, the nominal head refers to a result of the action or event
denoted by the sentential modifier, as in (57)-(58).
(57)[NP[IP sakana-ga yakeru] nioi]
fish-NOM burnsmell‘the smell that a fish burns’(Lit.)(58)[NP[IP doa-ga
simaru] oto]door-NOM shutsound‘the sound that a door shuts’ (Lit.)

In the same vein, like Japanese, the adnominal clauses of Chinese gapless relative
clauses can be analyzed as sentential modifiers. First, consider the Chinese counterpart of
(55).
(59)

[[工作很難找的]物理系][NP[IP gongzuo hen nanzhao]
de [NP wulixi]]
jobvery difficult look for DE
physics‘physics, which is hard to get a job in’

Second, there also exists the aboutness relation between the adnominal clauses of gapless
relative clause and the head noun (cf. Tsai 1997), as illustrated by (60) and (61).
(60)

魚燒焦的味道yu
fishshao-jiao de weidaoburn
De smell‘the smell of fish’s burning’-122-

On Gapless Relative Clauses in Chinese (J. H.-C. Tsai)

(61)

關門的聲音

guan men de shengyin
close door DE sound‘the sound of closing door’Significantly, the structures of the above gapless relative clauses parallel to the complex noun
phases with adjectival modifier in (62).
(62)

瓷的花瓶

ci
de huaping
porcelain DE vase‘a vase made of porcelain’
In short, we have demonstrated the drawbacks of characterizing Chinese gapless relative
clauses as true relatives in previous discussions. We thus conclude that Chinese gapless
relative clauses are complex noun phrases, as evidence by similar construals and relevant
properties in Japanese (cf. Murasugi 1991).
5.

Concluding Remarks

To sum up, we argue that the analysis assuming gapless relative clauses as one type of
relative clauses is not substantiated, and runs into empirical difficulties. Thus, we present aview that Chinese gapless relative constructions, like Japanese relatives, are not real relative
clauses; instead they are complex noun phrases with adnominal clauses restricting the domainof the head noun.

Reference
Aoun, Joseph and Yen-Hui. A. Li. (2003) Essays on the Representational and Derivational Nature ofGrammar: the Diversity of Wh-construction, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cha, Jong-Yul (1998)“Relative Clause or Noun Complement Clause: Some Diagnoses,”in B. S. Parkand J. H.-S. Yoon, eds., The Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Korean
Linguistics, International Circle of Korean Linguistics, Seoul, 6-9.
Cha, Jong-Yul (1999)“Semantics of Korean Gapless Relative Clause Constructions,”Studies in the
Linguistic Sciences 29, 25-41.
Chang, Chia-Hao, Frank (2006)“Gapless Relative Clause Constructions in Mandarin Chinese,”MA
thesis, National Chung Cheng University.
Cinque, Guglielmo (1999) Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Oxford
University Press, New York.
Hoji, Hajime (1985) Logical Form Constraints and Configurational Structures in Japanese, Ph.D.
dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.

-123-

Nanzan Linguistics : Special Issue 5

Huang, C.-T. James, Li, Y.-H. Audry, and Li, Yafei (2000) “Relativization: Order and Structure,” talkgiven at the 9th Conference of the International Association of Chinese Linguistics,
Singapore.
Huang, C.-T. James (1982) Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar, Ph.D.
dissertation, MIT.
Kim, Jong-Bok (1998)“On the Mixed Properties of Pseudo Relative Clauses,”in B.S. Park and J.
Yoon, eds., The Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Korean Linguistics,
International Circle of Korean Linguistics, Seoul, 83-93.
Kuno, Susumu (1973) The Structure of the Japanese Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Li, Yen Hui Audrey (2002)“Word Order, Structure, and Relativization,”in S.W. Tang and C.-S. Liu,
eds., On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 45-73.
McCawley, James D. (1988) The Syntactic Phenomenon of English, Volume 2, The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Murasugi, Keiko (1991) Noun Phrases in Japanese and English: A Study in Syntax, Learnability and
Acquisition, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut.
Murasugi, Keiko (2000) “Antisymmetry Analysis of Japanese Relative Clauses,” in A. Alexiadou, P.
Law, A. Meinunger, and C. Wilder, eds., The Syntax of Relative Clauses, John Benjamin,
Amsterdam, 231-264.
Ning, Chunyan (1993) The Overt Syntax of Relativization and Topicalization in Chinese, Ph.D.
dissertation, University of California, Irvine.
Simpson, Andrew (2002)“On the Status of 'modifying' DE and the Structure of the Chinese DP,”in
S.-W. Tang and L. L. C. Sheng, eds., On the Formal Way to Chinese languages, CSLI
Publications, Stanford, CA, 74-101.
Tang, Ting-Chi (1979) Studies in Chinese Syntax, Student Book Company, Taiwan.
Tsai, Hui-Chin Joyce (2008) “On Gapless Relative Constructions in Chinese, Japanese and Korean,”talk given at the Siena-Tsinghua-Nanzan Joint Workshop on Linguistic Theory andLanguage Acquisition, Nanzan University.
Tsai, Wei-tien Dylan (1997) “On the Absence of Island Effects,” Tsing Hua Journal of ChineseStudies, New Series 27, 125-149.
Vries, Mark. de (2000) “Nonrestrictive Relative Clauses,” in H. de Hoop and T. van der Wouden, eds.,
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2000, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 221-232.
Zhang, Niina (2007) “Gapless Relative Clauses as Clausal Licensors of Relational,” talk given at theInternational Workshop on Relative Clause, Academic Sinica.

-124-