Indirect complement or postmodifier in NP
0
In the sentence
He is the most talented artist (that) I know,
what is (that) I know in terms of function – an indirect complement, licensed by most, or simply a common postmodifier? Why?
Similarly, what is in the world in
the most talented artist in the world?
modifiers complements parsing
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
add a comment |
0
In the sentence
He is the most talented artist (that) I know,
what is (that) I know in terms of function – an indirect complement, licensed by most, or simply a common postmodifier? Why?
Similarly, what is in the world in
the most talented artist in the world?
modifiers complements parsing
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
1
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday
add a comment |
0
0
0
1
In the sentence
He is the most talented artist (that) I know,
what is (that) I know in terms of function – an indirect complement, licensed by most, or simply a common postmodifier? Why?
Similarly, what is in the world in
the most talented artist in the world?
modifiers complements parsing
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
In the sentence
He is the most talented artist (that) I know,
what is (that) I know in terms of function – an indirect complement, licensed by most, or simply a common postmodifier? Why?
Similarly, what is in the world in
the most talented artist in the world?
modifiers complements parsing
modifiers complements parsing
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
edited 2 days ago
marcellothearcane
4,3771640
4,3771640
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
asked 2 days ago
Hannah
666
666
1
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday
add a comment |
1
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday
1
1
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
0
Both of these are simply the Superlative construction.
Most is a superlative marker and takes a superlative construction. One of the things required for the construction is a range for comparison, which can be expressed as a relative clause modifying the superlative NP:
- He is the tallest boy who is in the class.
Of course, such relative clauses are often trimmed down to prepositional phrases by Whiz Deletion:
- He is the tallest boy in the class.
In your terms, yes, it's a post-modifier and it's licensed by most (or by -est).
If you called it an indirect complement I'd be puzzled, but that's nothing new.
I don't know what you'd call a reduced relative clause.
It may be a heretical notion, though it's not a new one.
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f479039%2findirect-complement-or-postmodifier-in-np%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
0
Both of these are simply the Superlative construction.
Most is a superlative marker and takes a superlative construction. One of the things required for the construction is a range for comparison, which can be expressed as a relative clause modifying the superlative NP:
- He is the tallest boy who is in the class.
Of course, such relative clauses are often trimmed down to prepositional phrases by Whiz Deletion:
- He is the tallest boy in the class.
In your terms, yes, it's a post-modifier and it's licensed by most (or by -est).
If you called it an indirect complement I'd be puzzled, but that's nothing new.
I don't know what you'd call a reduced relative clause.
It may be a heretical notion, though it's not a new one.
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
add a comment |
0
Both of these are simply the Superlative construction.
Most is a superlative marker and takes a superlative construction. One of the things required for the construction is a range for comparison, which can be expressed as a relative clause modifying the superlative NP:
- He is the tallest boy who is in the class.
Of course, such relative clauses are often trimmed down to prepositional phrases by Whiz Deletion:
- He is the tallest boy in the class.
In your terms, yes, it's a post-modifier and it's licensed by most (or by -est).
If you called it an indirect complement I'd be puzzled, but that's nothing new.
I don't know what you'd call a reduced relative clause.
It may be a heretical notion, though it's not a new one.
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
add a comment |
0
0
0
Both of these are simply the Superlative construction.
Most is a superlative marker and takes a superlative construction. One of the things required for the construction is a range for comparison, which can be expressed as a relative clause modifying the superlative NP:
- He is the tallest boy who is in the class.
Of course, such relative clauses are often trimmed down to prepositional phrases by Whiz Deletion:
- He is the tallest boy in the class.
In your terms, yes, it's a post-modifier and it's licensed by most (or by -est).
If you called it an indirect complement I'd be puzzled, but that's nothing new.
I don't know what you'd call a reduced relative clause.
It may be a heretical notion, though it's not a new one.
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
Both of these are simply the Superlative construction.
Most is a superlative marker and takes a superlative construction. One of the things required for the construction is a range for comparison, which can be expressed as a relative clause modifying the superlative NP:
- He is the tallest boy who is in the class.
Of course, such relative clauses are often trimmed down to prepositional phrases by Whiz Deletion:
- He is the tallest boy in the class.
In your terms, yes, it's a post-modifier and it's licensed by most (or by -est).
If you called it an indirect complement I'd be puzzled, but that's nothing new.
I don't know what you'd call a reduced relative clause.
It may be a heretical notion, though it's not a new one.
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
answered 2 days ago
John Lawler
84.1k6116328
84.1k6116328
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
Thanks @John Lawler! I'm confused by the part about being licensed, but still being a modifier though... and also, if it is indeed licensed by "most", it has to be indirect, right? So your answer seems a little bit contradictory to me. I'm sure it's just me being a bit slow though, so if you could clarify, I'd be very grateful.
– Hannah
2 days ago
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
I have no idea what you mean by "indirect". Licensing has to do with particular constituents that allow other constituents to occur, the way negation licenses negative polarity items like ever or any
– John Lawler
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
Sorry, I'm speaking in CaGEL's terms – I haven't got it with me at the moment, so I can't give page references unfortunately... but like "than this" in "a longer lecture than this" which is an indirect complement in the NP, since it's licensed by "-er" in "longer" rather than by the head noun. As for licensing, I agree, but I thought that was the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers – that complements, but not modifiers, need to be licensed, so I don't quite understand how it's not a complement if it needs to be licensed... see what I mean?
– Hannah
yesterday
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
That may be the whole point of the distinction between complements and modifiers, but frankly I don't find that to be a useful distinction, and I don't use it. Nothing particular hinges on it; it's just pilpul.
– John Lawler
14 hours ago
1
1
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
Pilpul – haha, I kind of agree, actually... I was just revisiting the idea of licensing and thinking basically just that. Might post a question about it, because as far as I can see quite a lot does hinge on it in CaGIL...
– Hannah
4 hours ago
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f479039%2findirect-complement-or-postmodifier-in-np%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I've edited in quote marks, because the italics on their own were a bit unclear.
– marcellothearcane
2 days ago
@Hannah "(that) I know" is a relative clause modifying "artist". In your other example, the PP "in the world" is complement of "artist".
– BillJ
2 days ago
@BillJ Would it be possible for you develop this in an actual answer? I'd be very interested to know more about the way in which the PP is a complement, and also your thoughts on the fact that the relative clause "(that) I know" seems to connect with the head noun in a whole different way in the original example, compared to the way it connects in "the artist that I know", where it's clearly and indisputably a postmodifier. Thank you!
– Hannah
2 days ago
I don't have much to add. Relative clauses are modifiers, not complements, so the matter of licensing does not arise. On reflection, though, I would say that the PP "in the world" is a modifier not a complement since it doesn't have to be licensed by the head noun "artist".
– BillJ
yesterday
@BillJ Ok – then I understand in "in the world", thanks! :) I had no idea that relative clauses were always automatically modifiers though – good to know :) I just think there is a clear difference in the connection between the head noun and the relative clause depending on whether or not we keep "most talented", but I suppose it's just my intuition that fails me then. Thanks again!
– Hannah
yesterday