O složenoj rečenici s uzročnom relativnom klauzom

Abstract

Starting from the fact, which hasn't been noticed up to now, that within compound relative sentences those with unrestrictive (parenthetic attributive adjective) relative clause are, only by their negative relative identity, one category, that is to say, they are category which hasn't its semantic invariant. In this study the author analyzes a semantic type of unrestrictive relative sentence — the one with causal relative conjunctive (e.g. Predrag Jurić, zoho гоas excluded in the last round, can't play in this match.) The author concludes that, in those compound sentences, syntax and semantics of the relative clause are asymmetrical: the relative clause is sintactically related only to substan tive antecedent in the main clause and semantically, as cause, is related to the whole content of the main clause. The incompatibility of the syntactic and the semantic connection is made possible by the role of the concept which is marked with substantive antecedent. That concept is included both in causal and in consequent content for it is most often „the cause” of the consequent content and relative clause, which is brought into the compound sentence throuhg it, usually only explicates that according to which it is „the cause”. The causality of unrestrictive relative clauses can be confirmed with substitution of the relative pronoun with some of the purely causal conjunctives. It's true that in this case the structural type of the sentence and the functional type of its subordinate clause are changed, but it's more important that there isn't any change neither in semantic value of the compo und sentence nor in the value of the subordinate clause in it. It shows, too, that between structural and semantic type of the sentence there is an unavoi dable parallelism. Since the relative pronoun zoho, as conjunctive element, is semantically neutral, the causality of the subordinate clause doesn't depend on it. The causal value of the relative clause is predetermined by its interrelationship with the content of the main clause. On that basis the author differentiates four types of the causal relative clauses. The motive which induced him to choose the relative clause instead of the semantically equivalent adverbial causal clause is that he prefered struc tural and stylistic plan to the communicative plan of the sentence. And such choice, without disturbing the communicative value, is made possible with the specific role of the concept marked with the substantive antecedent in the causal connection. To put this concept in the first plan is communicative intention, thanks to the use of the compound sentence with the causal rela tive clause.