vatsight01
In many cases of Relative Pronoun modifier clauses "that" becomes the subject referring to the preceding noun entity and fulfils the SV Pair condition ,then why in those questions the "noun entity" and "that" is not viewed separately as seen in the above question?
Hi
vatsight01,
A relative clause that describes a noun before it will
never provide a verb for the main or any other clause.
\(\left [{S_1} \right ] + \left [{V_1} \right ] + \left [{Obj_1} \right ] \left [that \left (verb \right ) | \left (sub + verb \right ) \right ] .\)
1. {X}
did not approve the {Y} {
that-relative clause}. ← This is a complete sentence because the subject, {X}, has a verb (
did approve).
2. {X}
said that the {A} {
that-relative clause}... ← This is
not a complete sentence. Even though the main subject, {X}, has a verb (
said), the subject after the first
that, {A}, doesn't have a verb.