Southern Sotho verbal relative constructions

Abstract

It transpires that Southern Sotho relative clauses can, on structural as well as functional grounds, be categorised as being either direct or indirect. The differences between the two categories pertain to the following: (a) differences in concordial agreement between the antecedent and the relative clause; and (b) differences in discourse-pragmatic function in as much as the direct relative predicates a characteristic feature or trait of the antecedent, while the indirect relative contextualises its antecedent by associating it with another referent. This article proposes that the direct relative should be regarded as a non-typical grammatical category, viz. a qualificative word with a clausal function.