-2

Are sentences like these

  1. The man got beaten up who James saw take the train yesterday.
  2. The potato was eaten that Hayley said she wanted.

with these meanings

  1. The man who James saw take the train yesterday got beaten up.
  2. The potato that Hayley said she wanted was eaten.

acceptable in any varieties of English?

What's the name of this syntactic phenomenon, and in which varieties of English is it acceptable and in which unacceptable?

Improve this question
1

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

This is not a random postposed clause. It is, like all syntax, rule-governed.
The rule in this case is called "Extraposition from N(oun) P(hrase)" in the trade.
It applies to more than relative clauses; the clause has to come from an NP.
Here's what it says on page 25 of this preliminary list of English syntactic rules:

F. EXTRAPOSITION FROM NP:

(a) For relative clauses (only restrictives can participate):
A sergeant [(that) I had never met] lurched in.
➞
A sergeant lurched in [(that) I had never met].

(b) For noun complements:
The claim [that our salaries should be tripled] was discussed.
➞
The claim was discussed [that our salaries should be tripled].

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    I wonder why The claim was discussed that our salaries should be tripled seems passable, while The potato was eaten that Hayley said she wanted does not.
    – Tinfoil Hat
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 3:21
  • @Tinfoil Hat Extraposition from NP is largely a higher register device, and Hayley eating her potato (or not) doesn't really fit. John's second example sounds more felicitous than his first to my ears.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Jan 20 at 12:21
-1

In which Englishes are "distant" relative clauses acceptable?

None.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.