undermine rival leaders he felt... [omission of subject relative pronoun]

LQZ

Senior Member
Mandarin
That comparison ignores the fact that the Cultural Revolution was orchestrated by Mao to undermine rival leaders he felt were insufficiently devoted to his revolutionary agenda. ---taken from the NYT

Dear all,

Should I think the writer missed who out between rival leaders and he felt? Is it a typo or an acceptable omission? Thanks.


LQZ
 
  • LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    Have a look at those for more detail; but essentially the idea is that in restrictive relative clauses you can omit relative pronouns which are not the subject of the verb. (Loob said in this thread)
    Dear panjandrum,

    I read all threads you gave and agree that what Loob has said. Now I am curious to know why relative pronouns functioning as the subject of a verb can be also omitted. Could you explain further?


    And I ran into another example of omission of the subject of a verb while reading news at the NYT.

    Since 2001, Mr. Ri has been the No. 2 at the organization department, a party organ Kim Jong-il used to consolidate his power in the 1970s and [that] is still believed to be heading. ---taken from the NYT
    Thank you in advance.


    LQZ
     

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    Well spotted LQZ!:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

    As far as I know (leaving aside certain usages on the borderline between standard and non-standard English) the situation in post 1 is the only situation in which you can leave out the subject of a relative clause - when that relative clause is introduced by indirect speech markers like "he said", "they felt", ""she considered", "we believed".

    So:

    That was the post [that] I said was wrong >That was the post I said was wrong
    He is the man [who] people believe will be the next Prime Minister.> He is the man people believe will be the next Prime Minister.
    Mao wanted to undermine rival leaders [who] he felt were insufficiently devoted to his revolutionary agenda.> Mao wanted to undermine rival leaders he felt were insufficiently devoted to his revolutionary agenda.

    I haven't (so far) come across any mention of this in textbooks/EFL websites, but it's been touched upon once or twice in the forum: I'll see if I can find the previous threads when I come back from walking my dogs;).

    Your second example isn't the same, though, as we can see if we expand it:
    ... the organization department, a party organ [that] Kim Jong-il used to consolidate his power in the 1970s and [that he] is still believed to be heading.
    With the thats, you've got the 'ordinary' omission of an object relative pronoun. With he, you've got omission of a subject which has been mentioned before and therefore doesn't need to be repeated.



    Let's hope the sun keeps shining:)!
     

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    Dear Loob, thank you so much. Hugging you if you don't mind.

    And my Yorkshire puppy also says hello to your dogs. ;)
     

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    Thanks for the hug, LQZ!

    I've done some hunting through previous threads, and this is the most memorable one for me - the one where I realised that subject relative pronouns could, in very restricted circumstances, be omitted: relative pronoun - omissible?

    All credit goes to Jean-Michel/LV4-26:).
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top