Owen — Revision of Pronouns. 87 



(7i) Of the relative sentence the relative clause may he hoth informa- 

 tional and restrictive. 



Such a clause is merely a peculiar illustration of that economy of 

 speech, which leads the linguistic marksman, when able, to kill two 

 "birds with a single stone. To illustrate, suppose that I wish to intro- 

 duce to you an acquaintance; in doing so I might employ the sentence, 

 "This is Mr. Brown." But suppose again that, knowing several per- 

 sons of that name, I wish to distinguish this one from others; in doing 

 so I may use the expression "This is the Mr. Brown met by me in 

 London."- Suppose also that, never having mentioned this meeting 

 before, I wish to inform you of it; I tell you that "This is the Mr. 

 Brown whom I met in London." 



Such usage is comparatively rare; and as it obviously carries with 

 it the peculiarities of both restrictive and informational usage, it may 

 \)e neglected in favor of these latter pure and simple. 



(i) Of the relative sentence the relative clause may he equivocal. 



By this I mean that the hearer may be uncertain whether the relative 

 clause be intended as informational or as restrictive. To illustrate, 

 ■"The strawberries which were ripe were greatly enjoyed," This sen- 

 tence may be taken as meaning either "Such strawberries as were ripe 

 (no others) were greatly enjoyed," or "The strawberries (incidentall;? 

 declared to be ripe) were greatly enjoyed." 



An effort has been made to differentiate such clauses by the scope 

 (content or extent) of the simultaneous factor, as it appears in the 

 relative clause. It is indeed obvious that, if the scope of this factor 

 in the relative clause be universal, that clause must be unavailable for 

 restrictive purposes. Thus, strawberries being all of them larger than 

 currants, it would be useless to say, with any restrictive intention, that 

 '"The strawberries which were larger than currants were enjoyed." 

 That is, I have no chance to distinguish berries from berries by their 

 superiority to currants. But it by no means follows conversely that, 

 if the simultaneous factor has only partial scope in the relative clause, 

 it is therefore unavailable for purposes of information. To illustrate, 

 "Strawberries, which arc very wholesome, are larger than currants." 

 In this sentence "which are wholesome" is plainly informational; to 

 construe it as aiming to indicate what berries are larger than currants 

 would be simply impertinent; it plainly expresses collateral informa- 

 tion. Yet in my statement that strawberries are wholesome you must 

 not suppose that I mean them all. I sRould wish to make a reservation 

 in the case of the unripe and the decayed. 



The scope of the simultaneous factor in the principal clause is an 

 equally unsafe guide. It is doubtless true that, if the scope of that 

 factor be universal, I shall not seek to restrict it. But it does not fol- 

 low that, if it be partial, I must restrict it; for I may even leave it as it 



2 1 use the past participle to avoid any appearance of assertion. 



