Editing Relative clause (section)

===Strategies for joining the relative clause to the main clause===
The following are some of the common strategies for joining the two clauses:
*Use of an indeclinable particle (specifically, a [[relativizer]]) inserted into the sentence, placed next to the modified noun; the embedded clause is likewise inserted into the appropriate position, typically placed on the other side of the complementizer. This strategy is very common and arguably occurs in English with the word ''that'' ("the woman that I saw"), though this interpretation of "that" as something other than a relative pronoun is controversial (see [[#English|below]]). In the modern [[varieties of Arabic]] (using ''illi'' placed after the modified noun); in [[Chinese language|Chinese]] (using ''de'' placed before the modified noun).
*Use of a [[relative pronoun]]. Prototypically, a relative pronoun agrees with the head noun in gender, number, definiteness, animacy, etc., but adopts the [[grammatical case|case]] that the shared noun assumes in the ''embedded'', not matrix, clause. This is the case in a number of conservative European languages, such as [[Latin]], [[German language|German]] and [[Russian language|Russian]]. Many languages also have similar linking words commonly termed "relative pronouns" that agree in some way with the head noun, but do not adopt the case role of the embedded clause. In English, for example, the use of ''who'' vs. ''which'' agrees with the animacy of the head noun, but there is no case agreement except in the formal English contrast ''who'' vs. ''whom''. Similarly, in [[Classical Arabic]], there is a relative pronoun that agrees in number, gender, [[definiteness]] ''and'' case with the head noun (rather than taking the case role of the noun in the embedded clause). Languages with prototypical relative pronouns typically use the gapping strategy for indicating the role in the embedded clause, since the relative pronoun itself indicates the role by its case. ([[Classical Arabic]], where the case marking indicates something else, uses a [[resumptive pronoun]].) Some linguists prefer to use the term ''relative pronoun'' only for the prototypical cases (but in this case it is unclear what to call the non-prototypical cases).
*Directly inserting the embedded clause in the matrix clause at the appropriate position, with no word used to join them. This is common, for example, in English (cf. "The person I saw yesterday went home"), and is used in [[Classical Arabic]] in relative clauses that modify indefinite nouns.
*By [[nominalization|nominalizing]] the relative clause (e.g. converting it to a participial construction). Generally, no relative pronoun or complementizer is used. This occurs, for example, in [[reduced relative clause]]s in English (e.g. "The person seen by me yesterday went home" or "The person planning to go home soon is my friend"). Formal German makes common use of such participial relative clauses, which can become extremely long. This is also the normal strategy in [[Turkish language|Turkish]], which has sentences equivalent to "I ate the potato of Hasan's giving to Sina" (in place of "I ate the potato that Hasan gave to Sina"). This can be viewed as a situation in which the "complementizer" is attached to the verb of the embedded clause (e.g. in English, "-ing" or "-ed" can be viewed as a type of complementizer).