Английского

§ 1. Subordinate clauses of secondary nominal positions include at-
tributive clauses of various syntactic functions. They fall into two 
major classes: "descriptive" attributive clauses and "restrictive" 
("limiting") attributive clauses. 
The descriptive attributive clause exposes some characteristic of 
the antecedent (i. e., its substantive referent) as such, while the re-
strictive attributive clause performs a purely identifying role, sin-
gling out the referent of the antecedent in the given situation. The 
basis of this classification, naturally, has nothing to do with the ar-
tistic properties of the classified units: a descriptive clause may or 
may not possess a special expressive force depending on the pur-
pose and mastery of the respective text production. Moreover, of 
the two attributive clause classes contrasted, the restrictive class is 
distinguished as the more concretely definable one, admitting of 
the oppositional interpretation as the "marked element": the de-
scriptive class then will be oppositionally interpreted as the "non-
restrictive" one, which precisely explains the correlative status of 
the two types of subordinate clauses. 
It should be noted that, since the difference between descriptive 
and restrictive clauses lies in their functions, there is a possibility 
of one and the same clausal unit being used in both capacities, de-
pending on the differences of the contexts. Cf.: 
At last we found a place where we could make a fire. The place 
where we could make a fire was not a lucky one. 
The subordinate clause in the first of the cited examples informs 
the listener of the quality of the place (→ We found such a place) 
thereby being descriptive, while the same clause in the second ex-
ample refers to the quality in question as a mere mark of identifica-
tion (→ The place was not a lucky one) and so is restrictive. 
Descriptive clauses, in their turn, distinguish two major subtypes: 
first, "ordinary" descriptive clauses; second, "continuative" de-
scriptive clauses. 
The ordinary descriptive attributive clause expresses various situ-
ational qualifications of nounal antecedents. The qualifications 
may present a constant situational feature or a temporary situ-
ational feature of different contextual relations and implications. 
Cf.: 
It gave me a strange sensation to see a lit up window in a big house 
that was not lived in. He wore a blue shirt the 

---

318
collar of which was open at the throat. They were playing such a 
game as could only puzzle us. 
The continuative attributive clause presents a situation on an equal 
domination basis with its principal clause, and so is attributive only 
in form, but not in meaning. It expresses a new predicative event 
(connected with the antecedent) which somehow continues the 
chain of situations reflected by the sentence as a whole. Cf.: 
In turn, the girls came singly before Brett, who frowned, blinked, 
bit his pencil, and scratched his head with it, getting no help from 
the audience, who applauded each girl impartially and hooted at 
every swim suit, as if they could not see hundreds any day round 
the swimming pool (M. Dickens). 
It has been noted in linguistic literature that such clauses are essen-
tially not subordinate, but coordinate, and hence they make up with 
their principal clause not a complex, but a compound sentence. As 
a matter of fact, for the most part such clauses are equal to coordi-
nate clauses of the copulative type, and their effective test is the 
replacement of the relative subordinator by the combination and + 
substitute. Cf.: 
I phoned to Mr. Smith, who recognised me at once and invited me 
to his office. → I phoned to Mr. Smith, and he recognised me at 
once... 
Still, the form of the subordinate clause is preserved by the con-
tinuative clause, the contrast between a dependent form and an in-
dependent content constituting the distinguishing feature of this 
syntactic unit as such. Thus, what we do see in continuative clauses 
is a case of syntactic transposition, i. e. the transference of a subor-
dinate clause into the functional sphere of a coordinate clause, with 
the aim of achieving an expressive effect. This transpositional 
property is especially prominent in the which-continuative clause 
that refers not to a single nounal antecedent, but to the whole prin-
cipal clause. E. g.: 
The tower clock struck the hour, which changed the train of his 
thoughts. His pictures were an immediate success on the varnishing 
day, which was nothing to wonder. 
The construction is conveniently used in descriptions and reason-
ings. 
To attributive clauses belongs also a vast set of appositive 

---

319
clauses which perform an important role in the formation of com-
plex sentences. The appositive clause, in keeping with the general 
nature of apposition, does not simply give some sort of qualifica-
tion to its antecedent, but defines or elucidates its very meaning in 
the context. Due to this specialisation, appositive clauses refer to 
substantive antecedents of abstract semantics. Since the role of ap-
positive clauses consists in bringing about contextual limitations of 
the meaning of the antecedent, the status of appositive clauses in 
the general system of attributive clauses is intermediary between 
restrictive and descriptive. 
In accord with the type of the governing antecedent, all the apposi-
tive clauses fall into three groups: first, appositive clauses of 
nounal relation; second, appositive clauses of pronominal relation; 
third, appositive clauses of anticipatory relation. 
Appositive clauses of nounal relation are functionally nearer to re-
strictive attributive clauses than the rest. They can introduce infor-
mation of a widely variable categorial nature, both nominal and 
adverbial. The categorial features of the rendered information are 
defined by the type of the antecedent. 
The characteristic antecedents of nominal apposition are abstract 
nouns like fact, idea, question, plan, suggestion, news, information, 
etc. Cf.: