The Ambiguous Notice: Relative Clauses and Converbs
A school notice reads: «Ուսուցիչը աշակերտին, որը հիվանդ էր, տվեց գիրքը»։ Parents read it in two ways: the teacher was ill, or the student was ill. The principal wants a clear version before the 1 p.m. bell. A second sentence in the same notice says: «Տնօրենը տեսավ աշակերտին դպրոցից դուրս գալիս»։ The editor suspects two ambiguities: the participial phrase may attach to the principal or to the student, and the phrase may describe the manner of seeing rather than the student's action. A third sentence, «Երբ զանգը հնչեց, բոլորը դուրս եկան», is clear. The editor must use syntactic tests, not just move words until they sound better.
1. Explain the source of ambiguity in the first sentence using constituency and attachment. Give two revisions that make each reading explicit.
Read the worked answer
Source: The relative clause «որը հիվանդ էր» can attach to the nearest noun phrase «աշակերտին» or to the subject noun phrase «ուսուցիչը»։ Armenian «որը» does not carry gender or number information that would force one antecedent, and both nouns are animate. The result is a structural ambiguity, not a vocabulary problem.
Reading 1 - student ill: «Ուսուցիչը գիրքը տվեց այն աշակերտին, որը հիվանդ էր»։ The correlative «այն» and the immediate adjacency of the relative clause lock the attachment to «աշակերտին»։
Reading 2 - teacher ill: «Այն ուսուցիչը, որը հիվանդ էր, գիրքը տվեց աշակերտին»։ Here the relative clause follows «ուսուցիչը» and is separated from the indirect object.
The revisions do not change the facts; they change the constituent structure so that only one attachment is possible.
2. Analyze the second sentence: identify the ambiguous attachment/control and give one revision that preserves the intended reading 'the principal saw the student leaving school'.
Read the worked answer
Source: «դպրոցից դուրս գալիս» is a converbal/participial phrase. Its implicit subject can be controlled by the main subject «Տնօրենը» or by the object «աշակերտին»։ The sentence can therefore mean that the principal was leaving school when he saw the student, or that the principal saw the student in the act of leaving school. There is also a manner reading: the principal saw the student 'while leaving' in some manner.
Revision for the intended reading: «Տնօրենը տեսավ, թե ինչպես աշակերտը դուրս եկավ դպրոցից»։ The finite «թե» clause gives the embedded event its own subject and removes control ambiguity. A more formal alternative is «Տնօրենը տեսավ աշակերտին, երբ վերջինս դուրս էր գալիս դպրոցից», where «վերջինս» explicitly refers back to the student.
3. Formulate two editing rules for placing relative clauses and participial phrases in Armenian official prose, and show how the rules apply to these sentences.
Read the worked answer
Rule 1 - adjacency: Place a relative clause immediately after its antecedent, and use «այն» or a repeated noun when the antecedent could be confused with another noun phrase. Application: in sentence 1, «որը» sits between «աշակերտին» and «տվեց», so it can reach either the object or the subject. Moving it after «աշակերտին» or after «ուսուցիչը» removes the competition.
Rule 2 - do not leave a converb's subject to guesswork: If the implicit subject of «-իս» is not the main clause subject, replace the converb with a finite subordinate clause or add «վերջինս»/«նախորդը»։ Application: sentence 2 leaves «դպրոցից դուրս գալիս» without an explicit subject, so the principal and the student compete for control.
General editorial test: Ask 'which noun phrase does this clause modify?' and 'who performs this participial action?' If the sentence does not answer both without context, revise the structure rather than adding a comma.