who

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

He is her brother who left the country. Ungrammatical (Semantics)

I was looking at the referencing between the Subject pronoun, the PossP, and the relative.

All the best,

I understand, but the relative clause obeys the rules.

He = her brother
her brother = the one who left the country

thus:

He = the one who left the country.

A: Who is that?
B: That's her brother.
A: But I thought her brother left the country.
B: He is her brother who left the country. He is back for a visit.

[navi tasan]

Hi Casiopea,
Thanks for your replies.

I think I have managed once more to create confusion. If only I could get paid for producing confusion!

This is the way I see things:

1-John is her brother. He graduated from Harvard.=John is her brother, who graduated from Harvard. (who clause, non-restrictive)

2-John is that brother of hers who graduated from Harvard, not the one who graduated from Yale.=John is her brother who graduated from Harvard not ... (who clause, restrictive)

3-Her brother graduated from Harvard, not her cousin.=It was her brother who (that) graduated from Harvard, not her cousin. (I think they call these cleft sentences)

4-Who was that on the phone?
It was her brother, the one that graduated from Harvard.=It was her brother who ("that" would not be wrong but would be bad) graduated from Harvard.

5-Who was that on the phone?
It was her brother. You know, he graduated from Harvard.=It was her brother, who ("that" would not be wrong but would be bad) graduated from Harvard.

Now I think these days native speakers sometimes use the restrictive clause instead of the non-restrictive clause:
A-His brother who is a doctor called us last night.
instead of:
B-His brother, who is a doctor, called us last night.

As far as I have understood, strictly speaking, A implies that she has more than one brother.

I think it is even more widespread with the "'s" possessive:
C-"Jane's brother who was there told us the story."

Can one really conclude from that sentence that she has more than one brother?
I am not sure.

In any case, these are just my opinions, and I am not a native speaker, so don't hesitate to correct me. I think I have created some confusion and I thought I might try to clear things up.

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

I understand, but the relative clause obeys the rules.

He = her brother
her brother = the one who left the country

thus:

He = the one who left the country.

A: Who is that?
B: That's her brother.
A: But I thought her brother left the country.
B: He is her brother who left the country. He is back for a visit.

I don't disagree. Actually, I'm trying very hard to grasp it. I really want to see it but I can't seem to make it out. It's tickling my cognitive bone something awful. Hep-me.

He is her brother who left the country. :( Possp
He, her brother, left the country. :D Pronoun
He is the guy who left the country. :D Noun
Her brother who left the country last year.... :( Possp
Her brother, who by the way left the country last year.... :D Possp
He is the brother that/who left the country.... :D Specific
He is the brother of hers that/who left the country.... :) Specific

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

I don't disagree. Actually, I'm trying very hard to grasp it. I really want to see it but I can't seem to make it out. It's tickling my cognitive bone something awful. Hep-me.

He is her brother who left the country. :( Possp
He, her brother, left the country. :D Pronoun
He is the guy who left the country. :D Noun
Her brother who left the country last year.... :( Possp
Her brother, who by the way left the country last year.... :D Possp
He is the brother that/who left the country.... :D Specific
He is the brother of hers that/who left the country.... :) Specific

And I don't disagree that the construction is a bit clumsy. I just can't get it to be ungrammatical. The presence of a possessive adjective should not preclude the presence of a defining relative clause; at least I know of no such rule.

Perhaps the bothersome part is that the possessive pronoun seems to identify the noun and the defining clause seems to define it again.

For example:

It is her brother who left the country.

With emphasis on "her", it sounds very natural.

This is her brother who left the country.

<separates this one of her brothers from another of her brothers>

This is her brother, who left the country.

<now there may be only one brother>

He is her brother who left the country.

<this does not seem as natural, but I can't really dispute the grammar>

I am as stuck on this one as you are.

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

The presence of a possessive adjective should not preclude the presence of a defining relative clause; at least I know of no such rule.

Perhaps the bothersome part is that the possessive pronoun seems to identify the noun and the defining clause seems to define it again.

For example:

1. It is her brother who left the country.
2. This is her brother who left the country.
3. He is her brother who left the country.

Thanx. :) I think I see it now. :D

'He' equates to the entire [closed] phrase 'her brother who left',

He is her brother who left.

That is, He = her brother who left,

Her brother who left is he. (That guy over there).

I was looking at something different: "He, her brother, is the one who left", wherein 'who' refers to 'the one', which refers to 'He'; 'her brother' modifies 'He'.

Thanx. 8)