Fronted subordinate clause with 'when'

[Philologic]

Hi Forum,

I have a problem understanding the relationship between these two sentences:

1) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she was a little girl"
2) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother, when I was a little girl"

In the first you can't reverse the clauses, but in the second, you can:
1) "When she was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of my mother" (nonsense)
2) "When I was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of my mother"

From a logical viewpoint the meaning of sentence 1) must be that some time in the past, I liked to look at pictures of my mother depicting her as a little girl. The meaning can't possibly be that at the time my mother was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her - simply because 'I' couldn't have been born at that time. Quite the contrary with sentence 2): the two versions mean the same.

Is that because 'when' in the first clause is not a conjunction but a relative pronoun?

Also that, however, doesn't really make sense, as 'when' can't substitute 'my mother" as a relative pronoun should. 'When' as a relative pronoun normally substitutes a noun with a time value e.g. 'last summer', 'yesterday', 'in my vacations'.

If I now substitute 'mother' with 'daughter", it does make some sense to reverse the clauses.
3) "I liked to look at pictures of my daughter when she was a little girl"
4) "When she was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of my daughter"

But I'm not sure if sentence 3) means that some time in the past, I liked to look at pictures of my daughter depicting her as a little girl, or it means what sentence 4) unambiguously states i.e. that at the time when my daughter was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her.

For these reasons I don't believe 'when' is a conjunction in sentence 1), and in sentence 3), only when it has the meaning of sentence 4).

The reason, I don't believe that, is that a subordinate clause initiated with a conjunction should be able to be fronted.

Maybe sentence 1) should correctly read: "I liked to look at pictures of my mother from (the time) when she was a little girl", as this then does turn 'when" into a relative pronoun and explains why the two clauses can't be reversed.

If sentence 3) is altered to "I liked to look at pictures of my daughter from when she was a little girl", it also no longer has the meaning of sentence 4).

A really nerdish question, I realize, but I would really appreciate if somebody savvy can shed some light.

 

[The Newt]

The questions are 1) What did you like to look at? ; and 2) When? In the first sentence the answer to the first sentence is "pictures of my mother when she was a little girl." No information is given as to when you liked to look at them except that it was in the past.

In the other sentence what you like to look at is "pictures of my mother"; the time when you looked at them is when you were a little girl.

The two sentences are only superficially similar.

 

[lingobingo]

In every case, the speaker or writer uses a time adverbial in reference to a particular person in the scenario described. Which person is obvious from both context and grammar.

1) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl"
2) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother, when I (the speaker) was a little girl"
3) "I liked to look at pictures of my daughter when she (the speaker’s daughter) was a little girl"
4) "When she (the speaker’s daughter) was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of my daughter"

 

[entangledbank]

The structural difference at the sentence level is clear. In 1) there's a modifier of a noun phrase, while in 2) there's a modifier of the main verb phrase:

1) "I liked to look at pictures of [my mother when she was a little girl]"
or [my mother in her early twenties] or [my mother dressed as a fairy]

2) "I liked [to look at pictures of my mother], [when I was a little girl]"
or [to see what she was like] or [if there was nothing on television] or [last week]

The main question is how 'when' forms a modifying phrase in 1). It almost looks like it could be a relative pronoun, but unlike a relative clause, there is nothing left out. So it looks like a conjunction/preposition/whatever:

my mother when she was a little girl
my mother while she was singing
my mother whenever she went to the shops

 

[Philologic]

The questions are 1) What did you like to look at? ; and 2) When? In the first sentence the answer to the first sentence is "pictures of my mother when she was a little girl." No information is given as to when you liked to look at them except that it was in the past.

In the other sentence what you like to look at is "pictures of my mother"; the time when you looked at them is when you were a little girl.

The two sentences are only superficially similar.

But the sentences
- "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she was a little girl"
- "I liked to look at pictures of my daughter when she was a little girl"

are very similar, yet the latter can be interpreted in two different ways. Because of this, the subordinate clause can be fronted in one of the interpretations.

In the interpretation that it happened at the time of my daughter being a little girl, 'when' is a conjunction, and the clauses can be reversed.

In the interpretation that it was specifially pictures of my daughter at a certain age that I liked to look at, the clauses can't be reversed.

From a grammatical point of view, why is that?

 

[lingobingo]

Grammatically, all versions work. Logically, one doesn’t.

I liked to look at pictures of {my mother/daughter when she was a little girl}
= I used to like looking at childhood photos of my mother or daughter

When my daughter was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her
When my mother was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her (impossible – you weren’t yet born!)

 

[The Newt]

But the sentences
- "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she was a little girl"
- "I liked to look at pictures of my daughter when she was a little girl"

are very similar, yet the latter can be interpreted in two different ways. [...]

Maybe. The use of the past tense in the second sentence is problematic. (When did you stop liking to look at pictures of your daughter?) Maybe it's just not a great example.

 

[Chasint]

In every case, the speaker or writer uses a time adverbial in reference to a particular person in the scenario described. Which person is obvious from both context and grammar.

1) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl"
...

That can't be right. When I read it, it means that you had a time machine and, at the time she was a child, could return to view pictures of her.

Surely the correct grammar is

"I liked to look at pictures of my mother, taken when she was a little girl"

or

"I liked to look at pictures of my mother from when she was a little girl"

 

[lingobingo]

1) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl"

Of course you can easily rewrite this unambiguously – e.g. by including the omissible word taken, as you suggest – but that doesn’t make the grammar itself incorrect. The phrase “when she was little girl” can be read as referring to when the pictures (photos of her as a child) were taken, not when the speaker looked at them. See post #6.

 

[Chasint]

1) "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl"
...

I'm a little confused. When I read "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl" my brain automatically registers the meaning "When my mother was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her."

This is because of the past tense "liked", i.e.

"When my mother was a little girl I liked to look at pictures of her"

you could not say

"When my mother was a little girl I like to look at pictures of her"

Summary

The locating of "liked" in the past, links it to "when my mother"

I must be missing something.

 

[lingobingo]

Yes, I get where you’re coming from. That of course is the obvious way to read it, especially out of context, but it’s not the only possible way. The past tense of liked could refer to just a year or so ago, shortly after the mother had died (when an offspring found it consoling to look at childhood pictures of her). It could even mean yesterday. That’s all I’m saying.

 

[Chasint]

Yes, I get where you’re coming from. That of course is the obvious way to read it, especially out of context, but it’s not the only possible way. The past tense of liked could refer to just a year or so ago, shortly after the mother had died (when an offspring found it consoling to look at childhood pictures of her). It could even mean yesterday. That’s all I’m saying.

It couldn't be yesterday because the use of simple past here implies 'over a period of time'.

Let's try something:

"In my 20's I liked to to look at pictures of my mother when she was a little girl."

The preamble places "liked" in a time-frame related to the speaker rather than the mother.

 

[Philologic]

I'm a little confused. When I read "I liked to look at pictures of my mother when she (the speaker’s mother) was a little girl" my brain automatically registers the meaning "When my mother was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her."

This is because of the past tense "liked", i.e.

"When my mother was a little girl I liked to look at pictures of her"

you could not say

"When my mother was a little girl I like to look at pictures of her"

Summary

The locating of "liked" in the past, links it to "when my mother"

I must be missing something.

Granted, I'm not a native speaker. That's why I'm asking you guys - but

"When my mother was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her" really grates on my ears. This indicates you were there when your mother was a litte girl, something impossible.
now, "When my daughter was a little girl, I liked to look at pictures of her" is certainly possible.

In order to reach some kind of common ground (assuming that grammar is useful) between these two sentences, the 'when' must refer to the time you were looking at those pictures, regardless of the age your mother/daughter might have been at in the pictures. For obvious reasons, you would never express the sentence with the mother.

If, however, you want to say that you liked to look at pictures depicting your mother/daughter at an early age, you would rather have to say,
"I liked to look at pictures of my mother/daughter from when she was a little girl" meaning "I liked to look at pictures of my mother/daughter from a time when she was a little girl".

This would change 'when' from being a conjunction into being a relative pronoun and would explain why you no longer can front the 'when' clause.

Doesn't that make sense?

 

[Chasint]

...

If, however, you want to say that you liked to look at pictures depicting your mother/daughter at an early age, you would rather have to say,
"I liked to look at pictures of my mother/daughter from when she was a little girl" meaning "I liked to look at pictures of my mother/daughter from a time when she was a little girl".

This would change 'when' from being a conjunction into being a relative pronoun and would explain why you no longer can front the 'when' clause.

Doesn't that make sense?

You and I agree at least! The "from" makes all the difference and that was my thought too in #8 - I came up with it in response to another contributor. On reviewing your original question I see you suggested it right at the beginning!