Lingua 102 (1997) 77-85

Pashto free relatives and triply-filled Comp :

Evidence for a headed analysis*

Taylor Roberts*
Department of Linguistics
and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Room 200-219, Cambridge. MA. 02139. USA

Received March 1996

Abstract
This paper shows that free relatives in Pashto are actually headed relative clauses, with the
consequence that a single structure underlies the apparent diversity of relative clauses in the
language. The data strongly suggest that the w&word of free relatives is not in Spec of CP,
but is entirely outside the relative clause, heading the apparently headless relative. Thus, the
Head Hypothesis of Bresnan and Grimshaw (I 978) is a more appropriate analysis of Pashto
relative clauses than is the Comp Hypothesis of Groos and van Riemsdijk (1981). While it is
able to maintain a headed structure for free relatives, Kayne’s (1994) raising analysis of rela-
tive clauses offers a further advantage by transparently deriving some otherwise puzzling dis-
tributional correlations among wh-words in the language.

1. Introduction

This paper presents data from Pashto (an Indo-Iranian language spoken in
Afghanistan and Pakistan) that hear on the issue of the headedness of free relatives,
in particular suggesting that, despite the surface diversity of relative clauses in the
language, a single structure underlies all of them. Analyses such as Bresnan and
Grimshaw (1978) and Groos and van Riemsdijk (198 1) have regarded the issue of
headedness as one that principally concerns whether the w&word of free relatives is
in Spec of CP at S-structure (the ‘Comp Hypothesis’) or is external to the relative
clause (the ‘Head Hypothesis’). Section 2 addresses this debate, showing that the
Pashto data strongly suggest that the w/z-word of free relatives is not in Spec of CP

* This research was supported by grant 752-96-0602 from the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada. Many thanks to my consultant, Mohammad Karzai, who supplied the data
for this article, and to Hamida Demirdache, Teun Hoekstra, Ruth King, Barry Miller, Barbara Robson,
and Michael Rochemont for their helpful comments on earlier versions.
* E-mail: troberts@mit.edu

0024-3841/97/$17.00 0 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved

PII SOO24-3841(96)00032-O
78 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 77-85

- as is commonly assumed to be the case for headed relative clauses in many lan-
guages - but is entirely outside the relative clause (the embedded CP), heading the
apparently headless relative. The evidence takes two general forms. First, Pashto has
a richer inventory of &z-words than English, and the different functions of these wh-
words provide insight into their structural position in free relatives. Second, Pashto
tolerates doubly-filled Comp and adjacent w/z-words in relative clauses, and when
such clauses also have an overt determiner, the only available position for the wh-
word of the corresponding free relative is the head of the construction.
Section 3 considers the structure of Pashto free relatives within Kayne’s (1994)
reincarnation of Vergnaud’s (1974) raising analysis of relative clauses. This analysis
has the advantage that it accounts straightforwardly for an important distinction
between two wh-words, tsokltsha ‘who’ and kum ‘which’; specifically, a raising
analysis captures a correlation between the properties of these wh-words in terms of
(a) whether they require a complement in main clauses, and (b) whether they may
appear as the single wh-word in a free relative. Although the raising analysis of
relative clauses does not offer a ‘head’ position that is external to the embedded CP
(in this account, ordinary and free relatives are distinguished by other structural
properties), nevertheless it will be seen that, even within a raising analysis, the kinds
of relative clauses in Pashto ultimately may be reduced to one type - namely, ordi-
nary headed relatives.
The variety of Pashto discussed here is spoken near Kandahar, Afghanistan; this
dialect is described by Penzl (1955), whose orthography is used to represent the
forms cited in this article. For recent overviews of Pashto, MacKenzie (1987) and
Tegey and Robson (1996) may also be consulted. There do not seem to be other
analyses of free relatives in Pashto; Penzl (1955: 141) provides only a cursory
statement about headed relatives.

2. Evidence for the Head Hypothesis

Free relatives are relative clauses without
English sentence, I like who Fred married. If
to ordinary, headed relatives (e.g., I like the
wh-word is in Spec of CP via wh-movement,
ated empty category, as shown in (1).
an overt head noun phrase, as in the
this sentence is analyzed analogously
person who Fred married), then the
and the missing head is a base-gener-

(1) I like [NP e [cp WhOi Fred married ti]]

This analysis is known as the Comp Hypothesis, so called because the wh-word is in
Comp (=Spec of CP) at S-structure. See Groos and van Riemsdijk (1981) for dis-
cussion. An alternative treatment of free relatives base-generates the wh-word in the
position of head, and Spec of CP is filled by an empty operator 0, binding its trace
in the embedded clause, as illustrated below:

(2) I like [NP who [cp Oi Fred married tJ]

 T.RohertslLin,quu 102 (1997) 7745 79

This analysis represents the Head Hypothesis (Bresnan, 1973; Hirschbuhler, 1976;
Bresnan and Grimshaw, 1978), though slightly modified here in order to be com-
pared more easily with the Comp Hypothesis. In its formulation by Bresnan and
Grimshaw (1978), for example, this analysis does not actually employ an empty
operator, nor movement, but instead a rule (Controlled Pro Deletion) that introduces
a trace, coindexing it with the w/z-head.
Some characteristics of Pashto w/z-words, interrogatives, and headed relative
clauses are outlined briefly below. The complementizer tshi functions essentially
like English that. Relevant wh-words are tsok and tsha, the direct and oblique case
forms corresponding to English who. The wh-word kum functions as an indefinite
determiner similar to English which in NPs like which man. Assuming Abney’s
(1987) DP Hypothesis, kum ‘which’ is a lexical head of the category D(et). How-
ever, there is an important difference between English and Pashto ‘which’: the for-
mer may select an empty NP complement (presumably headed by pro) and hence
may appear to stand alone, whereas the latter may not:

(3) [or ]n kuml hP * (yew>11sta wror dee

which (one) ~SG-POSSbrother be
‘Which (one) is your brother? ’

There is no such restriction on the wh-words tsokltsha ‘who (direct/oblique)‘, which

head NPs:

(4) a. [NP tsok] ghakhli

‘Who came? ’
b. da serray [NP tsha] woweha
DEF man who hit
‘Who hit the man? ’

Despite their categorial differences, the wh-words tsok and kum are equivalent and
interchangeable as relative pronouns, as shown in (5).

(5) da serray [cp tsok/kum tshi dee yee wehi] ddoddi khrri
DEF man whom/which COMP 3SG be hit bread eat
‘The man whom he is hitting is eating bread’

The relative pronoun is in Spec of CP via wh-movement. (Like Hindi, Pashto does
not have S-structure wh-movement in simple clauses: the wh-word remains in situ or
is scrambled, and in embedded interrogatives it may not be extracted beyond the
complementizer tshi.) The S-structure of the complex noun phrase in (5) is therefore
as follows:

(6) [DPda LVPserray [c&r tsok/kum,] [c tshi [tp dee ti yee wehi]]]]]
DEF man whom/which COMP 3SG be hit
80 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 77-85

When the relative pronoun is the D kum, its complement is possibly an empty oper-
ator, or some empty category other than pro, since the latter was seen to be disal-
lowed in (3). In sum, then, kum may appear alone (i.e., with an empty category com-
plement) only when it is in Spec of CP via w/z-movement, otherwise it selects an
overt complement as in (3). (Section 3 below will show how a raising analysis of rel-
ative clauses may explain this cluster of properties.)
This observation concerning the restricted distribution of kum has more significant
implications, as it offers some insight into the structure of free relatives in Pashto.
Consider the following example :

(7) hagha [tsok tshi Dzhenan woweha] ze yee wowehel

DEF whom COMP John hit 1s~ be hit
‘Whoever John hit, hit me’

The morpheme hagha is a demonstrative that frequently appears in simpler phrases

like hagha serr-uy ‘that man’. Assuming that tsok ‘whom’ is in Spec of CP (i.e., the
Comp Hypothesis) - analogous to the headed relative (5) - the complex noun phrase
in (7) has the following structure, where e marks the empty head:

(8) [oP hagha [NP e rep LNP tsok,l ]c tshi lip Dzhenan ti wowehalllll
DEF whom COMP John hit

However, there is evidence that the head position of the free relative in (7) is in fact
occupied by an overt phrase. Recall from the headed relative in (5) that tsok ‘whom’
and kum ‘which’ are interchangeable as relative pronouns. If the free relative in (7)
is analogous to the headed relative in (5), we should expect that kum may substitute
for tsok in the free relative, too. However, the free relative is ungrammatical with
kum as the relative pronoun:

(9) *hagha [kum tshi Dzhenan woweha] ze yee wowehel

DEF which COMP John hit 1s~ be hit
‘Whoever John hit, hit me’

Because (5) showed that the D kum may appear without an overt complement when
it functions as the relative pronoun of a headed relative, the contrast between (7) and
(9) constitutes evidence for a headed analysis of free relatives in Pashto, since the
site of the relative pronoun in (9) musr not be Spec of CP. Under such an analysis,
then, the head is not empty, as depicted above in (8), but is instead occupied by the
wh-word tsok ‘whom’:

(10) [nP hagha [NP tsok [cp LNP0,l ]c tshi LIP Dzhenan ti wowehalllll
DEF whom COMP John hit

Here, Spec of CP is filled by an empty operator, which binds its trace inside IP.
 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 77-85 81

There is another possible derivation for the Head Hypothesis representation: per-
haps tsok ‘whom’ originates in the embedded clause, and does in fact undergo wh-
movement to Spec of CP. Raising to head position ultimately occurs, deriving the
following S-structure:

(11) [or hagha [NP tsoki [c&r. ti] [c+ tshi [up Dzhenm ti w~weh41111
DEF whom COMP John hit

However, independent evidence for the derivation shown in (10) may be adduced
from (12) below, in which a second w/z-word appears.

(12) hagha tsok kum tshi Dzhenan woweha ze yee wowehel

DEF whom which COMP John hit 1s~ be hit
‘Whoever John hit. hit me’

Although ungrammatical in English, this type of relative with adjacent w/z-words and
a complementizer is fine in this variety of Pashto. As we have already seen, because
kum ‘which’ must be in Spec of CP, and tshi (COMP) in C, the only remaining posi-
tion for fsok is the head of the complex noun phrase:

(13) [DP hagha hP Isok kP[DP kum,] [c tshi [ip Dzhenan ti woweha]]]]]
DEF whom which COMP John hit

By analogy, then, a free relative with only a single wh-word tsok - as in (7) - indeed
must have the wh-word heading the relative, with Spec of CP filled by an empty
operator, as shown in (10).
The Comp Hypothesis analysis cannot easily reconcile the contrasting behaviors
of wh-words in free relatives with sentences like (12), which display what might be
called ‘triply-filled Comp’. The more general benefit of adopting the Head Hypoth-
esis, though, is that it allows a unified treatment of relative clauses in Pashto, since
the apparently headless relative in Pashto is in fact headed. While it is not obvious
to what extent the Head Hypothesis provides the correct analysis of free relatives in
languages like English, the facts presented here show that it may be applied trans-
parently to Pashto.

3. An advantage offered by a raising analysis

Vergnaud’s (1974) raising analysis of relative clauses, recently revived by Kayne

(1994), suggests an alternative structure for Pashto free relatives that may explain
the otherwise mysterious distributional properties of the wh-words tsokltsha ‘who’
and kum ‘which’ that were outlined in the previous section. In this analysis, the rel-
ative pronoun is a Do; in a headed relative clause like the book which I read, the Do
the selects a complement CP, and the larger DP constituent which book occupies the
‘gap’ position of the relative clause at D-structure, as illustrated below:
82 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 774.5

(14) [DPthe [cp I read [or In which1 [NPbook1111

W/z-movement then applies to the [+wh] DP, deriving the following intermediate
representation :

(15) bP the tcp bP LDwhich1 [NPbook]], LIPI read till1

Finally, the NP hook raises to specifier position of the higher DP (=Spec of which),
in order that it may be governed by the Do the, which selects the relative clause CP:

(16) [or the [cr [np [NP booklj [n which tjlli [IP I read t,III

Kayne (1994: 154 n. 13) suggests that headless relatives differ from headed relatives
in that the complement of the wh-determiner does not raise to a position governed by
the higher D”, so that the headless relative in we gave him what little money we had
would have the following D-structure:

(17) [or [cp [tp we had [or what little money]]]]

Wh-movement derives the following representation:

(18) [or [cp [nP what little money]i [tp we had ti]]]

The NP little money (which is the complement of the Do what) need not move fur-
ther, and so (18) will represent the desired S-structure.
In this analysis, then, terminology regarding the headedness of a relative clause
becomes misleading, since there is no head that is external to the relative clause
CP. The only element that is external to the CP is the Do that selects the relative
clause. This Do may be overt, as it is in (16), or null, as it is in (18). A ‘headed’
relative in a raising analysis is therefore one in which the complement of the
wh-word moves to Spec of wh in order to be governed by the external Do, while a
‘headless’ relative is one in which the complement of the wh-word does not move to
Spec of wh.
Consider the implications of such an analysis for Pashto headless relatives. It was
seen in (9) that kum ‘which’ is ungrammatical as the single relative pronoun in a free
relative. This fact now receives a straightforward explanation within the raising
analysis. The D-structure of (9) would be as follows:

(19) [or hagha [cp tshi LIP Dzhenan [op kuml wowehalll
DEF COMP John which hit

The DP kum ‘which’ undergoes wh-movement to Spec of CP:

(20) bP haghaLcpLOPkum], [c, tshi [,p Dzhenan t, wowehallll

DEF which COMP John hit
 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 7745 83

There being no complement of the Do kum ‘which’, there can be no further move-
ment to Spec of kum, as would happen in a ‘headed’ relative. However, recall from
(3) that the w&word kum ‘which’ obligatorily selects an overt complement in main
clauses. The ungrammaticality of (9) and the relevant version of (3) therefore have
the same cause: kum ‘which’ lacks a complement in each of these sentences. The
inability of kum ‘which’ to appear as the single w/z-word in a free relative is there-
fore explained by the raising analysis.
Consider next the ‘triply-filled Comp’ structure (12). The relevant portion of this
sentence would have a D-structure as in (21). Note that the Do kum ‘which’ takes the
NP fsok ‘whom’ as its complement; this w&word tsok ‘whom’ does not select a
complement. (Recall from (4) that this w&word need not take a complement in main
clauses, either.)

(21) [or hagha [cp tshi [rp Dzhenan [or kum tsokl wowehalll
DEF COMP John which whom hit

Then w/r-movement applies :

(22) [or hagha Icp [or kum tSOk]i [c tshi iIp Dzhenan ti woweha1111
DEF which whom COMP John hit

Finally, tsok ‘whom’ raises to Spec of kum in order to be governed by the Do hagha:

(23) [or hagha icp [DP tsokj [kum tj]]i [c tshi [,r Dzhenan ti woweha]]]]
DEF whom which COMP John hit

Thus, in the raising analysis, this variety of free relative clause corresponds to that of
canonical ‘headed’ relative clauses, since the complement of the [+wh] relative pro-
noun raises to Spec of wh.
Consider finally the free relative of (7). The single w/z-word tsok ‘whom’ is a Do
in this analysis, rather than an NP, as was suggested in the previous section. The D-
structure of the relevant portion of (7) would therefore be as follows:

(24) [or hagha [cp tshi [tp Dzhenan [DP tsokl wowehalll
DEF COMP John whom hit

WA-movement then derives the surface word order:

(25) [op hagha [cp [up tSOk]i [c, tshi [tp Dzhenan ti wowehallll
DEF whom COMP John hit

There being no apparent, further movement to Spec of tsok (there is no complement

of the Do &ok), a sentence like (7) would have to be classed with so-called headless
relatives, rather than with headed relatives (which do have further movement of the
complement of the w&determiner to Spec of wh). Such a conclusion differs from the
84 T. Roberts I Lir?,qua 102 (1997) 77-S

one that was suggested for this sentence in the previous section. There, it was noted
that the structural position of tsok ‘whom’ is ambiguous: it could be either in Spec
of CP (the Comp Hypothesis) or in the head position of the relative clause, external
to the relative clause (the Head Hypothesis). It was only on analogy to the triply-
filled Comp free relative in ( 12) - in which fsok ‘whom’ could perspicuously be seen
to be filling the head position - by which the ambiguity of the position of tsok
‘whom’ in (7) was resolved.
However, a similar analogy may be drawn within the raising analysis, in order to
allow free relatives having tsok ‘whom’ as the single w/z-word to be classed with
headed relatives. Specifically, it need only be stated of tsok that it must be governed
by the external Do hagha; just as fsok raises to Spec of DP in the triply-filled Comp
structure (23) in order that it can be governed by the Do hagha, so too must tsok in
(25) move to Spec of DP, as illustrated below:

(26) [or hagha Ccp [oP tsok, [tIlli [c tshi LIP Dzhenan ti wowehallll
DEF whom COMP John hit

Of course, such further movement of tsok may not be seen overtly when it is the only
w/z-word in the free relative - as it is here - but nevertheless the movement may be
inferred from such triply-filled Comp free relatives as (23), in which tsok does move
overtly. Thus, a free relative having only tsok ‘whom’ as relative pronoun is indeed
a headed relative clause, in the sense that the w/z-word is a DP that raises in order to
be governed by the Do that is external to the relative clause.

4. Conclusion

Because of the richness of w/z-words and complementizers that appear in relative

clauses in Pashto, free relatives in this language shed light on the issue of whether
such sentences should be analyzed as ‘headed’ or ‘headless’. Section 2 considered
this issue from the perspective of both the Comp Hypothesis and the Head Hypoth-
esis, concluding in favor of the latter. Section 3 demonstrated how a raising analy-
sis of relative clauses could be extended to Pashto, deriving some otherwise
puzzling distributional correlations among w/z-words in the language. The analysis
presented here therefore considerably simplifies a diverse range of facts and con-
structions, which initially appear to be unrelated - thus supporting the broader
hypothesis that a small number of grammatical principles underlie surface linguistic
dissimilarity.

References

Abney, S., 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.
Bresnan, J., 1973. ‘Headless’ relatives. Ms.
Bresnan, J. and J. Grimshaw, 1978. The syntax of free relatives in English. Linguistic Inquiry 9,
331-391.
 T. Roberts I Lingua 102 (1997) 77-85 85

Groos, A. and H. van Riemsdijk, 1981. Matching effects in free relatives: A parameter of core grammar.
In: A. Belletti, L. Brandi, L. Rizzi teds.), Theory of markedness in generative grammar: Proceedings
of the 1979 GLOW Conference, 171-216. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.
Hirschbtihler, P., 1976. Two analyses of free relatives in French. In: A. Ford, J. Reighard, R. Singh
(eds.), Papers from the Sixth Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, 137-152. Montreal
Working Papers in Linguistics 6.
Kayne, R.S., 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MacKenzie, D.N., 1987. Pashto. In: B. Comrie (ed.), The world’s major languages, 547-565. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Penzl, H., 1955. A grammar of Pashto: A descriptive study of the dialect of Kandahar, Afghanistan.
Washington, DC: American Council of Learned Societies.
Tegey, H. and B. Robson, 1996. Pashto reference grammar. Washington, DC: Center for Applied
Linguistics.
Vergnaud, J.-R., 1974. French relative clauses. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.