A discourse-pragmatic investigation of the interrelationship between the function and structure of Southern Sotho relative clauses

This article focuses on some pragmatic aspects of the function of Southern Sotho relative clauses. It acknowledges some overlap between the discourse pragmatic functions of direct and indirect clauses (Doke & Mofokeng 1957: 421), but points out that there is, in the majority of instances, a remarkable interrelationship between the structure and function of such clauses. The conclusion is drawn that the Southern Sotho indirect relative clause is used either to thematisise the referent of its head noun, or to restrict the reference of such a noun/noun phrase. The thematisising/restrictive nature of this type of clause is the result of an anchoring process whereby the referent of the head noun is associated in some or other way with another discourse entity. The direct relative clause, on the other hand, is used to characterise/describe the referent of its head noun by verbalising the identifying attributes of the referent of this noun/noun phrase. Such a description/characterisation does not involve any other entity than this referent itself. Such a clause is largely non-restictive in nature.