Talk:Relative pronoun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The need for a separate article

Last year this article was redirected to Relative clause after some discussion. I've turned Relative pronoun into a stub now, and placed "Relative clause" in the Systemic Bias list. I did this because a number of languages do not employ relative pronouns for relative clauses. --Pablo D. Flores 15:10, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Makes sense. I also think some content from relative clause should be moved back here, as discussed at talk:relative clause. Ruakh 04:03, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion of Greater Linguistic Issues

Linguists such as Kayne and Bianchi have suggested that relative pronouns are actually determiners that are stranded when the relativized noun phrase is raised from the embedded clause. Should this discussion be included here or is this too technical? (P.S. I'm all for this page remaining separate.) Straughn 22:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

If the theory has been published in peer-reviewed journals, and is not out of date, then it does make sense to mention it briefly and provide a link to one or two relevant peer-reviewed articles. Unless this is a very widely-accepted theory, though (and I'm not commenting on whether it is — I really have no idea), I don't think we should give too much space to it.

Incidentally, if there are any notable competing theories, then we should probably mention those as well.

Ruakh 00:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)