when- and where-clauses as modifiers: relative or not?

[nschneid]

I have been struggling with how to draw the line. Proposing the following:

Modifier clauses marked with when or where may be hard to classify as relative or non-relative. CGEL pp. 1078-1079 presents arguments that two structures are possible in some cases. We use the following heuristics:

1. A where-clause that modifies a reference to (broadly speaking) a place/situation/arrangement, or a when-clause that modifies a reference to a time, is a relative clause.

   • the hole where the ground caved in
   • I heard it on [a show where members of the administration often appear as guests]
   • I heard it on [one of the Sunday shows, where it is customary to have interviews with administration spokespeople]
   • the date when I’ll be back from my trip
   • please schedule it on [the 26th, when I’ll be back from my trip]

   An adnominal where-clause that can be readily paraphrased with in which or similar is also considered a relative clause:

   • a situation where/in which nobody wins
   • a journey where/on which you get to experience different cultures

2. If it is a where-clause and where has a locative meaning, treat it as a free relative.

   • Where I had lunch yesterday, it was very windy.
   • Where I was __ yesterday, it was very windy.
   • Where I came from __, it was very windy.

3. Otherwise, default to the non-relative analysis (acl or advcl). Here the adverb is functioning as neither interrogative nor relative.

   • Where you might be tempted to fold, I am willing to call the bet. (non-locative)
   • When Nixon resigned, the disruption was substantial.
   • Nobody had anticipated [the disruption when Nixon resigned]
   • the unemployment rate when Biden came into office

I am on the fence about whether to omit PronType in the 3rd case, because the adverb is neither interrogative no relative. The status quo is that any non-relative word with a PTB tag of WDT, WP, WP$ or WRB gets PronType=Int.

N.B. In #88 we decided that when and where are always ADV/advmod. While (except for nominal uses like a while) is considered SCONJ and not a relativizer.

[nschneid]

Borderline are cases where the clause modifies a noun meaning something generic like "issue" or "situation":

• the issue where nobody wants to leave - feels like case 3
• a situation where/in which nobody wants to leave - inclined to treat this as an RC, case 1

[nschneid]

• I'm under 21+ and looking for a nice place to take my boyfriend out for [dinner where they play music and there is a dance floor]. - this can be paraphrased as "in a place where" (not "in which place"). free relative?
  • actually, I think a better analysis is that the RC modifies "place" not "dinner"
• I told her it's normal to drink all day at a bar, then go to [dinner where you don't know half the people there] - similar. Arguably "there" represents the location slot of the "know" event (though it's annotated as a dependent of "people"), so is it right to say that "where" is extracted? Maybe this is an exception to case 2 and should be treated like case 3. Or is the sentence just a bit redundant?
  • RC should modify "go". "there" modifying "people" is OK even in an RC. "a bar where/in which half the people there are drunk"
• Perhaps, we should start with just a 1 or 2 day [contract where I give some thoughts to the kind of issues that we discussed and come to Houston to present my preliminary thoughts and possible avenues for additional work]. - paraphrase: "wherein", "in which". Generalize notion of "place" in case 1 to "place, situation, or arrangement"?
• Inspection of certain of the above inventory balances, by third party inspectors, where there is an expectation that circularisation replies will not be received on a timely basis - currently acl:relcl(Inspection, is)
  • easy paraphrase with "in which" Actually I think this is "where" in the sense of "if", so non-relative. Changing to advcl

[nschneid]

See also #388