[Grammar] Adjective Clause (why subject is omitted?)

[nininaz]

Hi Dear Teachers,
we know adjective clauseshave several parts: a relative pronoun ,a subject,and a predicate (a verb and, often, other types of words which follow it).
But why in In the following sentence the subject is omitted ?Is the relative pronoun (that) the subject of the following adjective clause ?

"The National Film Board of Canada was established in 1939 toproduce films that reflect Canadian life and thought."
Thanks

 

[Raymott]

"The National Film Board of Canada was established in 1939 toproduce films that reflect Canadian life and thought."
Thanks

What subject is missing? Where did you get that definition? (Really).
"That" refers to "films". The films reflect Canadian life and thought.
Adjective clauses don't repeat the subject (in this case, 'films'). If they did, they wouldn't need a relative pronoun.

 

[nininaz]

Thanks for reply, We know adjective clauses have several parts: a relative pronoun ,a subject,and a predicate.
In the sentence "films" is the "object "of the main sentence,"that" is "relative pronoun","reflect Canadian life and thought" is "adjective clause", reflect is "verb" and according to the necessary parts of adjective clause( a relative pronoun ,a subject,and a predicate) which part of sentence is subject?

 

[Raymott]

I'm asking where you got "We know adjective clauses have several parts: a relative pronoun ,a subject,and a predicate" from.
A relative pronoun is a pronoun that relates to a noun. In this case, that noun is 'films'. It's the object of the first clause and, by reference, the subject of the relative clause.

 

[nininaz]

Reference: http://www.eslcafe.com/grammar/adjective_clauses01.html
and http://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/adjective_clauses.htm

The Components of an Adjective Clause
An adjective clause (which can also be called an adjectival clause or a relative clause) will have the following three traits:It will start with a relative pronoun (who, whom, whose, that, or which) or a relative adverb (when, where, or why).

• (This links it to the noun it is modifying.)(Note: Quite often, the relative pronoun can be omitted. However, with an adjective clause, it is always possible to put one in. There is more on this below.)
  [*]It will have a subject and a verb.(These are what make it a clause.)
• It will tell us something about the noun.
  (This is why it is a kind of adjective.)

 

[Raymott]

OK, from your first link,
"Subject Pattern" Clauses "In this type of adjective clause, the relative pronoun is thesubjectof the clause."
From your second link: "Quite often, the relative pronoun is the subject of the clause"

That means that "that" is the subject. It's fine from a syntactic point of view to call "that" the subject. Semantically, if you want to understand the sentence, the subject is "films", which is referred to by "that".
Whether you call 'that' or 'films' the subject of the clause depends on what system you're taught.

 

[nininaz]

O.K , Thanks.
Actually in the first post I asked you: 'that' is the subject of adjective clause or not ?

 

[Raymott]

Actually in the first post I asked you: 'that' is the subject of adjective clause or not ?

Yes, sorry for confusing you. When I was taught grammar, "films" would have been referred to as the subject.

 

[MikeNewYork]

A relative clause can have a relative pronoun + a subject + a predicate, or it can have a relative pronoun that is the subject + a predicate. When the relative pronoun is the subject of the clause, it cannot be omitted. When the relative pronoun is not the subject of the clause, it usually can be omitted. Raymott was correct about a difference between semantics and syntax, but when we are parsing sentences, we are primarily interested in syntax.

These are the cakes that I made. (relative pronoun + subject + predicate)
These are the cakes I made. (relative pronoun omitted because it is not the subject)

In the original sentence, the relative pronoun cannot be omitted because it acts as the subject of the clause.

 

[nininaz]

No, That's o.k , I really appreciate your help.

 

[Winwin2011]

A relative clause can have a relative pronoun + a subject + a predicate, or it can have a relative pronoun that is the subject + a predicate. When the relative pronoun is the subject of the clause, it cannot be omitted. When the relative pronoun is not the subject of the clause, it usually can be omitted. Raymott was correct about a difference between semantics and syntax, but when we are parsing sentences, we are primarily interested in syntax.

These are the cakes that I made. (relative pronoun + subject + predicate)
These are the cakes I made. (relative pronoun omitted because it is not the subject)

In the original sentence, the relative pronoun cannot be omitted because it acts as the subject of the clause.

I am confused with the following:

These are the cakes that I made. (relative pronoun + subject + predicate)
These are the cakes I made. (relative pronoun omitted because it is not the subject)

In the original sentence, the relative pronoun cannot be omitted because it acts as the subject of the clause.

Could anybody give me some more examples showing that "the relative pronoun cannot be omitted because it acts as the subject of the clause", please?

 

[tzfujimino]

Hello, Winwin.:-D

Can you think of an example sentence using the relative pronoun 'who'?

 

[Winwin2011]

Hello, Winwin.:-D

Can you think of an example sentence using the relative pronoun 'who'?

Hello tzfujimino :-D

I think you are one of the most hardworking English teachers!

I like people who smile a lot. ("Who" acts as the subject of the relative clause here)

Hence, 'who' cannot be omitted in the above sentence.

 

[Raymott]

Could anybody give me some more examples showing that "the relative pronoun cannot be omitted because it acts as the subject of the clause", please?

"This is the cat that sat on the mat." 'That' is the subject of the relative clause, because 'that' refers to 'cat', and it was the cat that sat on the mat. Therefore you can't write, "This is the cat sat on the mat."

Oops, crossed with Winwin.

 

[tzfujimino]

As far as I know, the only case where the relative pronoun acting as a subject in the relative clause is omitted/dropped is, for instance:

"There's a man at the door wants to talk to you." (instead of saying "There's a man at the door who wants to talk to you.")

 

[MikeNewYork]

That sentence is incorrect. "Who" cannot be omitted there.

 

[tzfujimino]

That sentence is incorrect. "Who" cannot be omitted there.

Thank you, Mike.:-D
So, that means that the construction is uncommon(, or even incorrect) in AmE.
I was taught it's possible when I was a student.

In his Practical English Usage (Third Edition, on page 486), Michael Swan writes:

In a very informal style, a subject relative pronoun is sometimes dropped after there is.

It seems to be informal BrE.

 

[MikeNewYork]

If it is acceptable in BrE, it is news to me.

 

[Raymott]

It's wrong in AusE too. Whenever Michael Swan says "Sometimes this [incorrect] variant is used, I would read it as "You might hear this, but don't even think of using it." As we know, people will say anything. Sometimes I think that this extreme descriptivist agenda is not doing any favours to English learners.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Did Michael Swan give an example?