Editor for this issue: <>
If, as R. Hudson writes, "the chair on thats cushion I sat" is out due to a clash between the formality of pied piping and the informality of "thats", then aren't all the key cases that purport to show a P-that restriction not attributable to complementizer status for 'that' out for the same reason (e.g. "the chair on that I sat"). Or is there some perceived distinction between the two cases of pied piping? -David PesetskyMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Dick Hudson writes (Thu, 19 Sep 91) ... > Incidentally, THATS is always pronounced with Schwa, which > distinguishes it quite clearly from demonstrative THAT. I'd like to point out that this kind of evidence (as to which type of THAT `that' is) is, as far as I know, not available in N. American English, viz., British English has two pronunciations of `that', one for the COMP and the other for the PRON. (In my Cana- dian English they are pronounced identically, but in Britain the syntactic category affects the pronunciation.) In "the book thats cover is red" I think Dick is saying that it is pronounced as a pronominal `that', ruling out a previously suggested analysis (I'm not sure it was serious) as an elliptic form for "the book that its cover is red". Lionel Moser School of Cognitive & Computing Sciences University of SussexMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue