MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF UKRAINE

IVAN FRANKO NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LVIV

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

A CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF ATTRIBUTIVE CLAUSES IN ENGLISH

COURSE PAPER
PRESENTED BY
Dorozhovets Olena
a third-year student
of the English department

SUPERVISED BY
Roseanna Riadska
a lecturer
of the English department

LVIV 2023
 2

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………3
CHAPTER 1. Attributive clauses as an object of linguistic research…………………...5
1.1. Attributive subordinate clauses in terms of the complex sentence structure……5
1.2. Relative pronouns and adverbs as a means of introducing attributive clauses….7
1.3. The classification system of attributive clauses………………………………..12
1.3.1. Restrictive relative clauses………………………………………………..15
1.3.2. Non-restrictive relative clauses…………………………………………...16
1.3.3. Continuative relative clauses……………………………………………...17
CHAPTER 2. THE CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF ATTRIBUTIVE CLAUSES IN
ENGLISH………………………………………………………………………………19
2.1. Changes in the usage of attributive clauses in English…………………………19
2.2. The application of the qualitative method for determining the frequency of
attributive clauses across genres………………………………………………………..22
CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………...26
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………27
 3

INTRODUCTION

Language, as a dynamic and evolving entity, constantly reshapes itself through the
complex interplay of its various linguistic components. Among these components,
attributive clauses hold a pivotal role in English syntactic structures. Functioning as
modifiers within sentences, attributive clauses augment our comprehension of the
subjects they describe. Despite their ubiquity in everyday English usage, the underlying
patterns and functions of attributive clauses remain quite challenging to understand.
The complexity of attributive clauses has drawn the interest of researchers and
educators. These clauses, being a commonly recognized type of subordinate clause,
pose challenges for language learners. Additionally, attributive clauses, seen as a
linguistic phenomenon, hold significant importance in linguistic studies due to their
distinctive syntactic structure, frequent application, and grammatical significance.
There is a marked discrepancy of opinion concerning the problem of attributive
claauses. Therefore, it appears necessary to shed some light on the aforementioned
issues and scrutinize their features.
This course paper delves into the captivating realm of attributive clauses in English,
exploring their syntax, semantics, and pragmatic implications. However, rather than
relying solely on traditional theoretical frameworks and intuitive interpretations, this
study adopts a corpus-based approach, harnessing the power of extensive linguistic data
to illuminate the complex nature of attributive clauses.
In this study, the characteristics of attributive clauses are investigated from a
grammatical point of view.
The research focus centers on conducting a thorough investigation into the
intricacies of attributive clauses in English and their peculiarities in the practical use of
the sentences.
The object of the course paper is attributive clauses in English.
The subject of the study is corpus-based analysis of attributive clauses in English.
 4

The aim of the paper is many-fold and embraces the accomplishment of the
following tasks:
1) to compare the existing approaches and consolidate the insights into the theoretical
treatment of attributive clauses in English;
2) to discuss the key theoretical issues pertaining to attributive clauses, their taxonomy
and classification criteria;
3) to investigate the salient features of attributive clauses, relative pronouns and adverbs
in English;
4) to conduct a corpus-based investigation of the use and distribution of attributive
clauses across registers.
The paper is suggested to provide a comprehensive framework for the analysis of the
attributive clauses in English and their functioning on the grammatical level.
According to the spheres of concern the work falls into an Introduction, two
chapters, conclusion and the list of references.
Chapter I is concerned with the main features and classification system of attributive
clauses, specifically the detailed description of defining and non-defining clauses.
Chapter II of the paper deals with the corpus-based analysis of attributive clauses,
which involves the investigation of the change in the usage of attributive clauses in
American English and the examination of the frequency of attributive clauses.
The practical part of the thesis presents the analysis of the frequency of selected
attributive clauses. The analysis focuses on the two types of attributive clauses with
pronouns “which” and “that”.
The methods used in the course paper are the descriptive method, diachronic
method, quantitative and qualitative methods, distributional analysis and corpus
analysis.
The material of the research (sample sentences) has been taken from the Corpus of
Contemporary American English (COCA).
 5

CHAPTER 1. ATTRIBUTIVE CLAUSES AS AN OBJECT OF LINGUISTIC

RESEARCH

1.1. Attributive subordinate clauses in terms of the complex sentence structure

An attributive clause (also known as a relative clause) functions as a dependent

clause and serves as an adjective in English. It modifies a noun or noun phrase in the
main clause in order to provide additional information or specify a person, idea, or
object. A relative clause must always immediately follow the noun it modifies [4,
p.140].
Considering that relative clauses serve as subordinate or dependent clauses, they
cannot exist alone as complete sentences. The relative pronoun (or adverb) is utilized to
connect the relative clause to an independent clause. This is accomplished by making
reference to the noun or pronoun that is being modified [8].
By utilizing relative constructions, speakers are able to use a more complicated
expression within the context of a more comprehensive expression. In this sense, the
potential for recursion that language possesses is best exemplified by the concept of
relativization. A relative clause is referred to as a clausal modifier of a noun phrase,
which is known as the “antecedent” in traditional use. A more accurate characterization
is required in order to achieve a greater level of comprehension [15, p.1].
In (1), both the subject of the main clause and the internal argument of the predicate
are contained within the compound noun phrase that is enclosed by brackets. This
structure consists of an outer determiner “the”, a relativized noun phrase “magazine
about fashion”, and a relative clause “that Megan bought last month”.

1. Ann read [the magazine about fashion that Megan bought last month].

Even though it is technically a phrase, the relativized constituent is commonly

referred to as the relative head or head noun of the relative construction. This is because
 6

it serves as the primary focus of the relative construction. Not only does it combine as a
property with the outer determiner to generate a referential expression, but it also
assigns a variable to the internal argument position of the embedded clause (in this case,
bought). This is a characteristic that distinguishes the relative construction from other
constructions.
It is essential to differentiate relative clauses from other types of embedded clauses.
In (2a), a relative clause is used to modify the subject of the main phrase by identifying
the woman whom Ann admired. There is a subject variable within the relative clause
itself. However, in (2b) and (2c), there is no relativization. In (2b), the embedded clause
“that went to Rome” is the subject of the main clause, and in (2c), the embedded clause
“because Megan went to Rome” serves as an adverb. Each clause is complete on its
own.

2. a) Ann admired the woman that went to Rome. (relative clause)

b) Ann said that Megan went to Rome. (complement clause of the verb)
c) Ann was happy because Megan went to Rome. (adverbial clause)

As demonstrated by the minimal pair in (3), there is a distinction between relative

clauses and complement clauses even within complex noun phrases. Again, the relative
clause in (3a) contains a variable confined by the head (i.e., Megan told and is a rumor),
while the relative clause in (3b) does not. In essence, the relative clause identifies the
referent of the complex noun phrase (which rumor, as opposed to prospective
alternatives?) by attributing it to another property. In contrast, the complement clause
specifies what the noun phrase refers to (in this case, it exposes the rumor’s content).

3. a) Ann confirmed the rumor that Megan told. (relative clause)

b) Ann confirmed the rumor that Megan told a secret. (complement clause of the
noun)
 7

In some instances, the head is implicit. In (4a) the so-called headless or free relative
construction refers to the thing that Megan had written. The pronoun “what” contains a
connotative antecedent. Given the pronominal domain’s relatively common
syncretisms, this can cause confusion with embedded questions such as (4b).

4. a) Ann admired what Megan had written. (free relative clause)

b) Ann asked what Megan had written. (embedded question)

In traditional grammar, what-clauses are regarded as subject or object clauses, and

they are in a formal sense. Although, semantically, at the level of a deep structure, the
concept of attribute is established there. Formally, an attributive clause must follow the
noun, not the verb.
In conclusion, relative clauses provide supplementary or essential information by
modifying the nouns in the main clause. They are connected to independent clauses
using relative pronouns or adverbs and cannot exist alone as sentences. It is essential to
distinguish relative clauses from other embedded clauses.

1.2. Relative pronouns and adverbs as a means of introducing attributive

clauses

А relative clause may be introduced by connectives, which include relative pronouns

(who, whose, whom, what, which, that, as), and relative adverbs (when, where, why) [1,
p.309].
The columns of the following table illustrate the function of relative pronouns,
whereas the rows indicate whether the pronoun refers to a person or an inanimate object
in the defining relative clause. Sometimes, the pronouns used for humans are also used
for animals, notably pets [13, p.388].
In informal settings and spoken language, the pronoun “that” is utilized. If the
pronoun in the defining relative clause refers to the object of the clause, it can be
 8

omitted. To signify this, we use the phrase zero pronoun (-). In formal styles,
particularly in writing, “whom” is used in place of “who” as the object of the relative
sentence.

PRONOUNS USED IN DEFINING RELATIVE CLAUSES

Table 1.1.

The following table displays the role of the relative pronoun in the non-defining
relative sentence as columns, and the identity of the referred-to person or thing as rows.
Animals, especially pets, are sometimes referred to use the same pronouns as humans.
We cannot omit the relative pronoun or utilize “that” in non-defining relative
sentences [13, p.388].

PRONOUNS USED IN NON-DEFINING RELATIVE CLAUSES

Table 1.2.
 9

The selection of the suitable relative word ought to be guided by the categorical
meaning of the antecedent [1, p.309]:

1) If the antecedent refers to a living being, the relative pronouns “who, whom,
whose”, or “that” are to be used.
I have a lot of friends who I love [20].
Three research assistants were hired to interview people whom they knew [20].
Rare is the politician whose appetite for money is sated [20].
He wasn’t the individual that I would go to if I had a problem [20].

2) If the antecedent refers to an object or concept, the relative pronouns “which,

whose”, or “that” are employed; “that” is the least formal of these.
We have seen a lot of changes which are good for business [17].
This is the book whose title I couldn’t remember [17].
She picked up the hairbrush that she had left on the bed [17].

3) If the antecedent is expressed by the word “all” and refers to a living being, the
pronoun “who” or “that” is used. If the antecedent refers to a thing or concept, only the
pronoun “that” is used.
All who thirst for freedom may come with us [16].
All that remains is for me to make a few essential observations [16].

4) If the antecedent is denoted by “everything, something, anything”, or “nothing”,

the relative pronoun “that” is often employed, or else the clause is connected
asyndetically.
Everything that is known about him is to his credit [19].
Do something that will make her proud of y ou [19].
She says anything that comes into her head [19].
Apparently there is nothing that cannot happen [19].
 10

5) If the antecedent is modified by the adjective “only”, the pronoun “any”, or by a

superlative adjective, the attributive clause is introduced by the pronoun “that” or is
joined asyndetically.
The only feeling that remains, the only desire, the only need, that can never be
satisfied, is that of protecting the child [16].

6) If the demonstrative pronoun “such” modifies the antecedent, the relative pronoun
“as” is used.
He was painting with such feeling as couldn’t anyone expect.

7) After the antecedent modified by “same”, several relative expressions may be

used:
the same people as..., the same man who..., the same book that...,
the same time when..., the same place where..., etc.

8) Only formal and literary English employs relative clauses after personal pronoun
[12, p.184].
He who laughs last laughs longest. (proverb)
..we that are young/ Shall never see so much, or live so long. (Shakespeare, King
Lear)

9) “Why” is a relative adverb that refers to antecedents that indicate cause or reason.
The reason why we don’t envy her is because she’s too weird.

10) The relative adverbs “when” and “where” connect attributive clauses to
antecedents denoting spatial or temporal concepts.
That was the week when we booked our holiday.
 11

11) Relative clauses beginning with “whatever” (= anything or it doesn’t matter

what), “whoever” (= the person/group who or any person/group who), or “whichever”
(= one thing or person from a limited number of things or people) are used to talk about
things or people that are indefinite or unknown (Hewings 1999:144)
I’m sure I’ll enjoy eating whatever you cook.
Whoever wins will go on to play Barcelona in the final.
Whichever one of you broke the window will have to pay for it

The final choice of the relative pronoun in a clause also depends on [13, p.388]:
 the type of clause (defining or non-defining);
 the function of the pronoun in the clause (subject, object, possessive determiner
or object of a preposition);
 the style (formal or informal)

In conclusion, relative clauses are helpful for facilitating comprehension by

connecting ideas and providing context. The relative pronoun that should be used
depends on several factors, including the category of the antecedent, whether the
antecedent is a person or an object, and the formality or informality of the text. By
employing relative pronouns and adverbs such as “who, which, that, when, where,” and
“why”, we can have more fluid conversations. In addition, the choice of pronoun may
vary depending on whether the clause is defining or non-defining, as well as the
pronoun’s function within the clause.
In order to gain a deeper understanding of relative clauses and the use of relative
pronouns, we will discuss the classification system of relative clauses in the next
section.
 12

1.3. The classification system of attributive clauses

According to Sheldon’s (1974) classification of relative clauses, they fall into four
categories - SS, SO, OS, and OO. The following table provides explanation and
examples of these categories:

The head noun functions as the object of the main clause, while the relative
OS pronoun serves as the subject of the relative clause.
Example: He knows a girl who passed the exam.
The head noun serves as the object of the main clause and the relative
OO pronoun serves as the object of the relative clause.
Example: He knows a girl who(m) you are waiting for.
The head noun serves as the subject of the main clause and the relative
SS pronoun serves as the subject of the relative clause.
Example: The girl who passed the exam is his daughter.
The head noun serves as the subject of the main clause, while the relative
SO pronoun serves as the object of the relative clause.
Example: The girl whom you have met passed the exam.

THE FOUR TYPES OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

Table 1.3.

Sheldon discovered that the SS and OO types of phrases, which use parallel
functions, are simpler to understand than the SO and OS types, which use non-parallel
functions [11, p.273].
SS: The dog that jumps over the pig bumps into the lion.
SO: The lion that the horse bumps into jumps over the giraffe.
OS: The pig bumps into the horse that jumps over the giraffe.
OO: The dog stands on the horse that the giraffe jumps over. (Sheldon 1974:275)
 13

However, contrary findings undermined Sheldon’s arguments. Kuno (1974), based

on a purely theoretical analysis of numerous languages, argued that center embedding
lowered the comprehensibility of sentences because center-embedded sentences
interfered with the natural language process. Processing OS and OO types without
center embedding is thus simpler than processing SS and SO types with center-
embedded relative clauses [6, p.120].
Data from 87 speakers of five languages provided by Ioup and Kruse (1977) showed
that the OS type was the most easily processed, followed by the OO, SO, and SS types
[5, p.162].
Similarly, Schumann (1980) agreed with Kuno (1974) and Ioup and Kruse (1977).
According to his analysis of the relative clause statistics from earlier studies, OS and
OO sentence forms are simpler to analyze than SS and SO sentence types. This study
built upon and confirmed the findings of its predecessors.
According to Stauble’s (1978) analysis of native English speakers’ informal speech,
spontaneous writing, and published writing, 55% of relative clauses were of the OS
structure, 25% were of the OO construction, 12% were of the SS structure, and 7% were
of the SO structure. The four forms of structure were distributed similarly in
Schumann’s (1980) research of ESL learners: 53% OS structure, 35% OO structure, 6%
SS structure, and 4% SO structure [14].

Additionally, relative clauses may be divided into two distinct categories:

1) Relative clauses that can be eliminated from a sentence without altering its
meaning. These clauses are separated from the main clause by a pause. They may be
separated by a comma in written form. These clauses are never joined asyndetically to
the main clause. This type of clause is known as a non-restrictive or non-defining clause
and is always descriptive [2, p.282]. For example:
 14

She told me that she had discovered a wonderful young man, who was going to help
her in the East End.
She asked me a question, which I did not hear.
On her sofa there was a note-book open, in which she was preparing her lessons for
the term.

2) Relative clauses that are integral to the meaning of the sentence and cannot be
eliminated without altering its meaning. There is no pause between this type of clause
and the main clause, and they are never separated by a comma in writing. These clauses
may be connected to the main clause either with connective words or asyndetically.
Depending on the situation or context, relative clauses of this type are known as
restrictive or defining clauses [2, p.283]. For example:

He took the cigarette that Robert offered him.

I remembered what I used to feel about the young men Charles brought to the house.
In the back of her mind was the memory that it was the city her friend came from.

The meaning of a restrictive (defining) clause is dependent on the meaning of the

sentence containing the antecedent, whereas the meaning of a non-restrictive (non-
defining) clause is more autonomous; the contents of a non-restrictive clause may often
be expressed by an independent statement providing further information on an
antecedent that has previously been sufficiently defined. It should also be noted that a
sentence with a restrictive clause comprises a single statement, whereas a sentence with
a non-restrictive clause comprises two statements [9, p.265].
In conclusion, Sheldon’s classification of relative clauses provides a framework for
understanding their different structures and functions. The categories of SS, SO, OS,
and OO clarify the relationships between the head noun and the relative pronoun in
these clauses. Relative clauses can also be categorized as either non-restrictive or
restrictive based on their impact on the sentence’s meaning. Non-restrictive clauses
 15

provide additional descriptive information and are set apart from the main clause, while
restrictive clauses are essential to the sentence’s meaning and are directly connected to
the main clause. Understanding these distinctions enhances our comprehension of the
role and significance of relative clauses in language. A more detailed characterization of
restrictive (defining) and non-restrictive (non-defining) clauses will be provided in the
following sections.

1.3.1. Restrictive relative clauses

Restrictive (or defining) clauses restrict the meaning of the antecedent to the extent
that the sentence’s meaning is severely impaired when the clause is omitted. Both the
main and subordinate clauses in such constructions are mutually limiting [3, p.284].

People who sleep enough are happier than people who don’t sleep enough.

The relative clauses “who sleep enough” and “who don’t sleep enough” are used to
specify the noun “people” in the preceding sentence. This variety of relative clause
changes the meaning of the noun it modifies. Essentially, people “who sleep enough”
and people “who don’t sleep enough” represent two distinct categories of people.
Without the proper relative clauses, the reader would not understand this meaning.
When referring to humans in restrictive relative clauses, we typically use the relative
pronouns “who, whom, that”. The relative pronouns “which, that” are used to refer to
non-human entities.
In writing, restrictive clauses are more prevalent than non-restrictive clauses.
Sometimes, a restrictive clause is also called an essential clause or phrase [18].
Here are some more sentences that illustrate how a restrictive relative clause can
alter the meaning of a noun:

Students learn a lot. Students who ask questions learn a lot.

 16

People are bad. People who abuse animals are bad.

In conclusion, restrictive clauses are essential in specifying the meaning of the

antecedent, and their omission significantly impacts the sentence’s meaning. They
create distinct categories and limit the relationship between the main and subordinate
clauses. Further discussion will be concerned with non-restrictive clauses.

1.3.2. Non-restrictive relative clauses

Relative clauses that are non-restrictive (or non-defining) provide supplementary

information that does not limit or specify the meaning of the antecedent. They provide
optional, additional information and can be omitted without significantly altering the
sentence’s meaning.
When referring to humans in non-restrictive relative clauses, we typically use the
relative pronouns “who, whom”. The relative pronoun “which” is used to refer to non-
human entities [18].

Cupcakes, which he loves to eat, have been prepared by his mother today.

In the preceding sentence, the relative clause “which he loves to eat” modifies
“Cupcakes” but does not alter the essential meaning of the sentence: Cupcakes have
been prepared by his mother today.
The following is another example:

Creativity, which may take many forms, is a quality all human beings have.

“Creativity” is modified by the relative clause “which may take many forms” but the
additional information does not alter the essential meaning of the sentence.
 17

In conclusion, non-restrictive relative clauses provide supplementary information

without limiting or specifying the antecedent. They offer optional details that can be
omitted without altering the sentence’s meaning. When referring to humans, “who” and
“whom” are typically used, while “which” is used for non-human entities. These
relative clauses modify the nouns they are attached to but do not fundamentally change
the essential meaning of the sentences.

1.3.3. Continuative relative clauses

Certain non-restrictive clauses refer back to entire sentences, not just nouns. These
relative clauses are known as continuative (or setential) clauses. They are generally
introduced by “which” or “that” depending on the context. Continuative clauses may be
separated by a semicolon, a comma, or even a period [3, p.284].

He lived in his own flat, which was convenient.

They are interested in grammar – which is remarkable.
Several times he caught her looking at him with a hurt, puzzled expression, which
pleased his evil mood.

The relative clause “which pleased his evil mood” in the preceding sentence refers
back to the entire sentence, not just a noun. It provides supplementary information and
does not alter the sentence’s essential meaning.
In conversation, a sentential relative clause may also be interjected by another
speaker (Simon 2013:387):

“Then he goes on to say how much he appreciates all the effort we’ve put into it.”
“Which is strange because he never seemed to care much about what we do.”
 18

Thus, continuative (sentential) clauses are non-restrictive clauses which refer to

entire sentences. They are introduced by “which” or “that” and can be separated from
the main clause by punctuation.
 19

CHAPTER 2. THE CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF ATTRIBUTIVE CLAUSES IN

ENGLISH

2.1. Changes in the usage of attributive clauses in English

To conduct a corpus-based analysis of relative clauses, the Corpus of Contemporary

American English (COCA) is used. It is the only comprehensive and representative
corpus of contemporary American English which comprises more than one billion
words of text (more than 25 million words per year from 1990 to 2019) from eight
genres: spoken, fiction, popular magazines, newspapers, academic texts, TV and movie
subtitles, blogs, and other web pages [20].
Using the diachronic method of analysis, we will investigate relative clause
phenomena over time. The primary objective of this section of our research is to analyze
the evolution of relative clause usage from 1990 to 2019. For this purpose, we have
taken the two most common relative pronouns - “which” and “that”.
The following table illustrates the frequency of the usage of the pronoun “which”
during 1990-2019. It can be spotted that the word “which” gradually decreased in the
usage over the years if we compare 1990 and 2019. However, it should be noted that not
all sentences containing the word “which” are necessarily relative.
In 1990-1994 the frequency was the highest and it reached the lowest point during
2005-2009. This indicates a declining trend in the early 2000s. From 2005 to 2014, the
frequency remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations. However, from 2014
to 2019 the usage of “which” slightly increased [20].
 20

Years 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09 2010-14 2015-19

Frequency 196561 188854 180735 172025 172290 184169

THE FREQUENCY OF THE USAGE OF THE PRONOUN “WHICH” DURING

1990-2019
Table 2.1.

Below are provided examples of relative clauses containing the pronoun “which”
from various time periods and various genres:

It doesn’t matter which side you park on, there’s always an opposite side. (COCA,
TV, 1990)
Finally, there is the word depression, for which there is no official definition.
(COCA, MAG, 1992)
It’s working because he generates public support for a plan which he does not
explain in detail. (COCA, SPOK, 1993)
You interrupted an endless conversation which leads nowhere and accomplishes
nothing. (COCA, TV, 1994)
And that is how I came from the old country to America, about which I certainly
have no regrets. (COCA, ACAD, 1998)
We’re talking about laws which have existed longer than civilization. (COCA, TV,
1999)
We’re trying to develop a sense of self, which often manifests itself in a reluctance to
communicate with parents and other authority figures. (COCA, TV, 2004)
Now, Jack is still very new at this, which means that we all have to monitor him
closely. (COCA, TV, 2019)
 21

The next table depicts the results of the search of the pronoun “that”. Evidently, this
word is utilized significantly more often than “which”. However, it should be noted that
not all sentences containing the word “that” are necessarily relative. The frequency of
the usage of the pronoun “that” remained relatively stable with some fluctuations over
the years and eventually increased if we compare 1990 and 2019.
From 1990 to 1999, there was an increase in the frequency from 1000249 to
1047045. However, from 1999 to 2004, there was a slight decrease in the frequency
from 1047045 to 1003267. This indicates a fluctuation in the usage during the late
1990s and early 2000s.
There was a noticeable increase in the frequency of usage from 2010 to 2019, with
the frequency rising from 1010585 to 1094015. This suggests an upward trend in the
usage of the relative pronoun “that” in the later years of the analyzed period [20].

Years 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09 2010-14 2015-19

Frequency 1000249 1047045 1003267 991006 1010585 1094015

THE FREQUENCY OF THE USAGE OF THE PRONOUN “THAT”

DURING 1990-2019
Table 2.2.

Below are provided examples of relative clauses containing the pronoun “that” from
various time periods and various genres:

Watching, waiting for an unseen enemy that has no face. (COCA, TV, 1999)
But this is the last thing that I need right now. (COCA, TV, 1999)
Two thirds of the spacecraft that have ever gone there have died. (COCA, TV, 2004)
 22

The result is a doctrine that has predictably come to favor local defendants. (COCA,
ACAD, 2017)
It was a big, bold, expensive party that featured more than 165 family members and
friends, many bused down from his retirement. (COCA, NEWS, 2018)
With the announcement that it plans to create a cryptocurrency, Facebook is
continuing its unchecked expansion. (COCA, MAG, 2019)

To conclude, the diachronic analysis of the relative pronouns “which” and “that”
from 1990 to 2019 reveals notable patterns. The frequency of “which” exhibited a
gradual decline, with a notable decrease in the early 2000s, followed by a modest
increase in the later years. Conversely, “that” displayed a higher frequency and
remained relatively stable, showing slight fluctuations, and eventually experiencing an
upward trend from 2010 to 2019. Various examples of relative clauses were examined
to provide illustrative instances from different time periods and genres. These findings
contribute to our understanding of the evolution of relative clause usage over the
analyzed period.

2.2. The application of the qualitative method for determining the frequency of
attributive clauses across genres

This section is devoted to the study of the usage and functions of relative clauses in
various literary and spoken genres. The relative pronouns “which” and “that” were
searched in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and analyzed in
various contexts.
Table 2.3 illustrates the frequency of using the pronoun “which” in different genres.
The highest frequency occurs in the genre of ACAD (academic) with 302656 instances.
Different genres show variations in the usage of “which”. For instance, the WEB genre
has a relatively high frequency of 288584, while FIC (fiction) and SPOK (spoken)
 23

genres have lower frequencies of 65372 and 168336, respectively. The lowest frequency
is observed in the TV/M (television/media) genre with 65372 instances [20].

SECTION ALL BLOG WEB TV/M SPOK FIC MAG NEWS ACAD

23011
FREQ 1613324 288584 65372 168336 127185 234802 196270 302656
9

THE FREQUENCY OF USING THE WORD “WHICH” IN DIFFERENT GENRES

Table 2.3.

Exemplified following sentences help to illustrate how relative clauses with pronoun
“which” function in various literary forms:

They leave one job, which they may have liked perfectly well, to accept a better-
paying job elsewhere. (COCA, BLOG, 2012)
They know the names of the biggest players, and have a rough idea which “team”
they belong to. (COCA, BLOG, 2012)
The staphylococcal toxin which causes vomiting is not inactivated even if it is
boiled. (COCA, WEB, 2012)
My next trip was to the Human Life International Annual Meeting, which took place
in Montreal, Canada. (COCA, WEB, 2012)
These are the coordinates from Felicity’s tape, which means she’s in there
somewhere, hopefully, alive. (COCA, TV, 2019)
Praise dancing, which I do often in church, it makes me feel free. (COCA, SPOK,
2019)
 24

And so he’s just trying to change the subject, which is what he usually does. (COCA,
SPOK, 2019)
The flatbed , which must be huge, looks like a toy. (COCA, FIC, 2019)
She has forgotten to buy cheese for the chili, which makes Mark muss up her hair
and say, “Classic Claudia.” (COCA, FIC, 2019)
The availability of the mobile operating system, which is open source, will be limited
to China for now. (COCA, MAG, 2019)

Table 2.3 illustrates the frequency of using the pronoun “which” in different genres.
The genre with the highest frequency of the relative pronoun “that” is SPOK (spoken)
with 2,394,796 instances, indicating its frequent usage in spoken language. This is
followed by WEB with 1,726,704 instances, suggesting its prevalent use in web-based
content.
Overall, the analysis reveals the varying usage patterns of the relative pronoun “that”
across different genres. Its high frequency in spoken language and web-based content
indicates its frequent usage in informal and online contexts [20].

SECTION ALL BLOG WEB TV/M SPOK FIC MAG NEWS ACAD
159393 172670 239479 105986 120860 110524 124463
FREQ 11593624 1259834
9 4 6 6 6 2 7

THE FREQUENCY OF USING THE WORD “THAT” IN DIFFERENT GENRES

Table 2.2.

Exemplified following sentences help to illustrate how relative clauses with pronoun
“that” function in various literary forms:
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection
below. (COCA, BLOG, 2012)
 25

I have quite a few programs that don’t run the way they should. (COCA, BLOG,
2012)
I hope that they come to a quick decision that is based on facts and truths. (COCA,
WEB, 2012)
It sparked some healthy conversations that would not have have happened
otherwise. (COCA, WEB, 2012)
It’s your future that concerns me, Jonah. (COCA, TV, 2019)
I got word that a group was hiding out in the woods, waiting for a boat out. (COCA,
TV, 2019)
She preferred the earth that allowed her to water her hibiscus and mint without
wondering where the water would go. (COCA, FIC, 2019)
Johnny grabs a bag that has some tools inside. (COCA, MAG, 2019)
Police say there’s no indication that any others were involved in planning or
assisting the attack. (COCA, NEWS, 2019)
This leads to the possibility that women may simply change from the oppressed to
the oppressor. (COCA, ACAD, 2019)

Thus, the analysis of relative clauses usage across various genres reveals distinct
patterns. The pronoun “that” exhibits high frequencies in the spoken and web-based
genres, indicating its prevalence in informal and online contexts. Conversely, the
pronoun “which” demonstrates varying frequencies across genres, with the academic
genre exhibiting the highest frequency. These findings shed light on the usage and
functions of relative clauses in different literary and spoken contexts, providing
valuable insights into the nuances of language usage in various genres.
 26

CONCLUSION

The results of the study show that relative clauses are commonly used in English
language in various genres of written and spoken literature. The most frequently used
relative pronoun in relative clauses is “that”, followed by “which”. The study also found
that relative clauses are often used to provide additional information about the subject of
a sentence.
The research on the usage and frequency of relative clauses has yielded valuable
insights into their historical patterns and development. The analysis reveals a gradual
decline in the frequency of relative clauses with pronoun “which”, followed by a
modest increase, whereas the frequency of relative clauses with pronoun “that” has
remained relatively stable, with minor fluctuations and an upward trend in recent years.
The examination of examples from various disciplines and time periods enhances
our comprehension of relative clause usage. The findings emphasize the prevalence of
“that” in spoken and web-based genres, highlighting its function in informal and online
contexts.
Additionally, the varying frequencies of “which” across genres, with the highest
frequency occurring in the academic genre, contribute to our understanding of relative
clause usage in various literary and spoken contexts. These findings have far-reaching
implications for the study of language usage and offer precious insights into the nuances
of relative clause usage in different genres.
In the course of our research, it was discovered that the Corpus of Contemporary
American English (COCA) contains an extensive collection of sources which include
relative clauses of two primary types.
Our paper’s aim was achieved, and conclusions were developed, thanks to our
thorough investigation and careful selection of the most appropriate approaches.
27
 28

REFERENCES

1. Грамматика английского языка: Морфология. Синтаксис. / Кобрина Н.А.,

Корнеева Е.А., Оссовская М.И., Гузеева К.А. – С.-Петербург: “СОЮЗ”, 1999.
C.309-311.
2. Крылова И.П. Грамматика современного английского языка / Крылова И.П.,
Гордон Е.М. – М.: Университет, 2003. C.283-284.
3. Федоренко О.І. Граматика англійської мови. Теоретичний курс: навч. посібник /
Федоренко О.І., Сухорольська С.М. – Видавничий центр ЛНУ ім. Івана Франка,
2008. C.284-285.
4. Advanced grammar in use: наук. зб. – Cambridge University Press, 1999. P.140-141.
5. Ioup G., Kruse A. Interference versus structural complexity in second language
acquisition: language universals as a basis for natural sequencing – Washington, 1977.
P.159-171.
6. Kuno S. The position of relative clauses and conjunctions. Linguistic Inquiry. –
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1974. P.117-136.
7. Meyer C.F. English Corpus Linguistics: An introduction. – University of Cambridge,
2002.
8. Murray Anna, C. GRAMMAR AND MECHANICS: Understanding Relative Clauses. –
City University of New York, 2019.
9. Rayevska N.M. Modern English Grammar. – Vyshcha Shkola, 1976. P.265-266.
10. Schumann J. The acquisition of English relative clauses by second language learners. –
Newbury House, 1980. P.118-131.
11. Sheldon A. The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in
English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. – University of Minnesota,
1974. P.272-281.
12. Side R., Wellman, G. Grammar and Vocabulary for Cambridge Advanced and
Proficiency. – University of Cambridge, 1999. P.184-185.
 29

13. Simon P. The Grammaring Guide to English Grammar. – University of Szeged, 2013.
P.386-388.
14. Stauble A. A Frequency Study of Restrictive Relative Clause Types and Relative
Pronoun Usage in English. – UCLA, 1978. P.388-398.
15. Vries M. Relative Clauses in Syntax – University of Groningen, 2018. P.1-2.

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

16. Для всех ваших потребностей в изучении языка/ – bab.la, 2023

(https://www.babla.ru).
17. Explore the English Grammar/ – University of Cambridge, 2016
(https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar).
18. Grammar and Mechanics: Relative, Restrictive, and Nonrestrictive Clauses/ –- Walden
University, 2023
(https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/formandstyle/writing/grammarmechanics/clauses).
19. Learn how to use a word in a sentence/ - Searchsentences, 2023
(https://searchsentences.com/#gsc.tab=0).

ILLUSTRATIVE RESOURCES

20. Statistics: Frequency list of the top 60,000 words in the corpus/ - The Corpus of
Contemporary American English, 2013 (https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/).