I just did some reading about subordinate clause because I need to write about it for my Indonesian Japanese language learning blog Yumeko. It seems that in English and Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia) we need relative pronouns such as who, which, and yang:
Nick gave a handful of potato chips to the dog who was sniffing around the picnic tables.
Nick memberi sejumlah keripik kentak ke anjing yang sedang mengendus-endus di sekitar meja-meja piknik.
On the other hand, the subordinate clause in Japanese has the same form as its independent clause:
ピックニックテーブルの周りで嗅ぎ回っている犬
pikkunikku teeburu no mawari de kagimawatteiru inu
the dog who was sniffing around the picnic tables.
It means that in Indonesian and English the underlined clause cannot stand on its own as a complete sentence while the one in Japanese can.
On the consistency in the grammatical structure of describing nouns, English isn’t consistent. Look at these three examples of how a simple adjective modifies a noun:
blue book (MODIFIER HEAD)
buku biru (H M)
青い本
aoi hon (M H)
We can see that when subordinate clause is used, the English language switches to use the H M structure.
The last interesting point is that the Indonesian subordinate clause above can directly function as a noun phrase without any modification:
Yang sedang mengendus-endus di sekitar meja-meja piknik adalah anjing temanku.
The one sniffing around the picnic table is my friend’s dog
Did I misanalyze?