How To Distinguish Non-Defining From Defining Relative Clauses — From Roundabout

A defining (embedded) relative clause cannot typically be fronted (as Theme), since it functions as the Qualifier in a nominal group realising a direct or indirect participant.

A non-defining (ranking) relative clause can be fronted (in the clause nexus), as in:

Founded in 1690 by Prince Constantine Brancoveanu, the monastery of Horezu is a masterpiece of the ‘Brancovenesti’ style.*

Built by King Philip, the Royal Monastery of San Lorenzo El Real is a must-see of Madrid.°

See the discussion of these fronted non-finite hypotactic elaborating attributive clauses in Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 404).

* analysis requested by Claudia Stoian on Sysfling, April 2012 (see here)

° analysis requested by Claudia Stoian on Sysfling, October 2012

How To Distinguish Non-Defining From Defining Relative Clauses — From Below

In terms of how they are typically realised phonologically:

• a non-defining (ranking) relative clause and the clause it hypotactically elaborates are each 'realised by a tone group, and each tone group selects the same tone' (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 396), whereas

• a defining (embedded) relative clause does not 'form a separate tone group' (op cit: 429).

Sample Identifying Clause Analysis

Clause:

Adiposity and low aerobic fitness in children are associated with a clustering of cardiovascular risk factors.

Analysis:

Adiposity and low aerobic fitness in children: Token

are associated with: Process: relational: intensive

a clustering of cardiovascular risk factors: Value

Reasoning:

Viewed from 'round about', this clause is the receptive agnate of the clause:

People associate adiposity and low aerobic fitness in children with a clustering of cardiovascular risk factors

where people functions as Assigner/Agent.

If ASSIGNMENT is only an option for relational clauses of the intensive kind (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 237), then the process is intensive, not circumstantial.

Viewed 'from above', association is a type of extension in figures of being-&-having (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 145-6), so this is an instance of extension (meaning) being realised as elaboration (wording). (The meaning of extension is here lexicalised rather than grammaticalised.)