Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive account of the structure and function of spoken relative clause constructions based on a systematic distinction between spontaneous spoken and formal written language. Spoken language relative clause constructions in English and German are structurally and pragmatically different from the complex relative constructions available in written language. They are structurally simple in terms of their noun phrases and argument structure. The form of pronouns is limited, especially in English. Relative pronouns have subject and direct object function. Non-subject head nouns are highly preferred. Predicate complement and broadly existential heads predominate in conversation. Embedding occurs in restricted contexts with informationally largely redundant relative clauses and the German verbal bracket is largely irrelevant. Many relative clauses have heads which are not part of a clause. All these features combine to downgrade verbs and events. As a result, the focus on referents is concentrated in spoken language. Relative clauses fit into a wider picture of pre- and postmodification in spoken language. They offer a compact, right-expanding solution to referent description. The distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses is largely irrelevant for spoken language, nor can relative clauses be considered to be backgrounded. Instead they are best analysed in terms of three functions, serving to describe, intensify/confirm or identify the nature of referents. The discourse function of relative clause constructions as well as constraints on spoken language are central to their structure and the paper therefore provides further evidence of a usage-based account of language with implications for both linguistic theory as well as language acquisition.