On 08.08.2013 17:25, David McCann wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 23:23:56 +0200
> M Forster <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hello conlangers,
>> I'm currently working on relative clauses and considering different
>> placements. My language is mostly VSO and head-first and my current
>> model for relative clauses works like this (simplified):
>>      head-noun verb subject object REL
>>      "the man go he the bar who"
>>      "The man who went to the bar"
>> Now my question is: Do you know of any natlang that does this? I'd 
>> be
>> very interested to know.
> It's not really likely. A relative pronoun (uncommon anyway) is a
> combination pronoun and conjunction, and a conjunction must start the
> clause; how else would we know that it was a new clause?

In this language it's clear that a new clause starts because a verb 
always starts a new clause, and the arguments follow the verb. The 
relative "pronoun" here would *end* the clause, and be a way to specify 
the type of relative clause at hand; e.g. there could be different ones 
for incidental and restrictive clauses.

Of course it's very possible that this kind of construction isn't found 
in any natural language.

> In English we
> have to stick with that even when the result is ambiguous:
> That is the model whom the artist helped to paint.
> A more common pattern is to have a conjunction and pronoun:
> *That is the model that the artist helped to paint her
> *That is the model that the artist helped her to paint
> So
> man who go bar
> man that go [he] bar
> The shared subject is generally dropped in the subordinate clause

Yes, but some languages don't drop it. In any case, this point is not 
so important to the question at hand.