Cross-Linguistic Typology of Relativization (WALS Chapters 122/123)

@cite{comrie-1989} @cite{keenan-comrie-1977} @cite{comrie-2013}

WALS-aggregate findings on relative-clause formation strategies from two WALS chapters by @cite{comrie-2013}. The RelativizationProfile struct

• strategy enums + WALS converters live in Typology/Relativization/Defs.lean; per-language data lives in Fragments/{Lang}/Relativization.lean.

Ch 122: Relativization on Subjects

How languages form relative clauses on subject position. Strategies: gap (the relativized position is empty), pronoun retention (a resumptive pronoun fills the relativized position), relative pronoun (a dedicated wh-element fills the position and typically fronts), non-reduction (head noun repeated inside the relative clause).

Sample: 166 languages (WALS v2020.4). Gap dominates for subjects, reflecting the high accessibility of subject position on the @cite{keenan-comrie-1977} hierarchy.

Ch 123: Relativization on Obliques

Whether oblique positions can be relativized, and by what strategy. Many gap-on-subject languages switch to pronoun retention or relative pronouns for obliques, or cannot relativize obliques at all.

Sample: 112 languages (WALS v2020.4). Gap remains the most common strategy, but pronoun retention is much more common than for subjects, and a sizeable minority of languages cannot relativize obliques at all.

@cite{keenan-comrie-1977} Accessibility Hierarchy

The Accessibility Hierarchy ranks grammatical positions by their accessibility to relativization:

Subject > Direct Object > Indirect Object > Oblique > Genitive > Object of Comparison

Three Hierarchy Constraints follow:

1. HC₁: A language must be able to relativize subjects.
2. HC₂ (Continuity): Any RC-forming strategy must apply to a continuous segment of the AH.
3. HC₃ (Cut-off): Strategies that apply at one point may cease at any lower point.

From these, the Primary Relativization Constraint follows: if a language's primary strategy can apply to a low position, it can also apply to all higher positions.

theorem Typology.Relativization.gap_most_common_for_subjects : (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.gap) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length > (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.nonReduction) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length ∧ (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.nonReduction) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length > (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.relativePronoun) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length ∧ (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.relativePronoun) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length > (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.pronounRetention) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length

WALS Ch 122: gap is the most common subject relativization strategy, followed by non-reduction, relative pronoun, and pronoun retention.

theorem Typology.Relativization.retention_increases_for_obliques : (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F123A.ObliqueRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F123A.ObliqueRelativization.pronounRetention) Typology.Relativization.ch123✝).length > (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F122A.SubjectRelativization.pronounRetention) Typology.Relativization.ch122✝).length

WALS Chs 122/123: pronoun retention is more common for obliques than for subjects — a key Accessibility-Hierarchy prediction (@cite{keenan-comrie-1977}).

theorem Typology.Relativization.obliques_sometimes_not_relativizable : (List.filter (fun (x : Data.WALS.Datapoint Data.WALS.F123A.ObliqueRelativization) => x.value == Data.WALS.F123A.ObliqueRelativization.notPossible) Typology.Relativization.ch123✝).length > 0

WALS Ch 123: some languages cannot relativize obliques at all, contrasting with subjects, where the Ch 122 enum has no "not possible" value.