Owen — Revision of Pronouns. 95 



it is emphasized by the completeness with which it meets that 

 need. The restrictive chnise is not, then, used for its own sake, 

 but for the sake of the principal It is not, like the informa- 

 tional, egoistic ; it is altruistic. Its purpose is to aid the inform- 

 ational effort of the principal. 



(Ji) lis Procedure. 



In examining this it is convenient to begin with cases in Avhich, 

 to use the words of Grammar, 



(a) The relative word is subject of the relative clause. 



Let such be illustrated bv ''The c:uest who bowed to Smith is 

 my nephew\'' Reviving the doctrine proposed on p. 60 that 

 the value of ''who" is not structural, but only instructional (like 

 that of plans and specifications), and assuming that the instruc- 

 tion offered by "who" has been duly utilized, let attention be con- 

 fined to structural elements only. Such elements may be pre- 

 sented, and their simultaneous factor indicated, by the diagram, 



rpi ^ ( — bowed to — Smith (relative) 



Ihea-uest -^ . ^ , • • ^^ 



( — is — my nephew (prmcipal) 



t)' 



The psychological reactions attending the presentations of 

 ideas in the above tw^o clauses are by no means alike. In "The 

 guest is my nephew" (principal), since you regard ideas named 

 as mutually suitable to thought-formation, you accept my sug- 

 gestion to combine them into a thought. On the other hand, 

 in "The guest bowed to Smith" (relative), since you perceive 

 ideas named to be put by me as forming a thought, you infer 

 that they are mutually suitable for thought-formation. That 

 is, in the principal clause, because ideas are mutually suitable, 

 you combine them into a thought ; but in the restrictive clause, 

 because ideas are combined into a thought, you accept them as 

 mutually suitable. 



To complete my purpose, you must comply with two condi- 

 tions. In the first place, while conceiving the ideas named by 

 "The guest bowed to Smith" as in a general way mutually suita- 



