Sentences in which each of the coordinated noun phrases has its own determiner are in principle eligible for the two analyses in (382). In (382a), it is assumed that backward conjunction reduction has taken place, which results in the coordinated antecedent reading, i.e. the reading in which the relative clause is interpreted as a modifier of both adjuncts. In (382b) no conjunction reduction is assumed, and in this structure the relative clause modifies only the second conjunct, resulting in the non-coordinated antecedent reading. For convenience, the scope of the relative clause is given in bold.

The assumption of conjunction reduction is necessary to account for the availability of the coordinated antecedent reading, since restrictive relative clauses are part of the NP-domain and thus do not take the determiner in their scope; it is not possible to construct a structure in which the two conjuncts are both in the scope of the relative clause without including at least the second determiner as well. Although we will see in Section 16.3.2.4.2, sub II, that the conjunction reduction analysis is not without its problems, we will provisionally adopt it, since it allows us to highlight certain problems related to the adjunction site of relative clauses.

Non-restrictive relative clauses differ markedly from restrictive ones in that it is never necessary to appeal to conjunction reduction to account for the coordinated antecedent reading; we could simply adopt the structures in (383). In (383a) the relative clause modifies the two conjuncts, which is possible since non-restrictive relative clauses do take the determiner in their scope. In (383b), on the other hand, the relative clause modifies only the second conjunct. The scope of the relative clause is again indicated in bold.