An analysis of relative clauses in Navajo looks at a paradox that is rooted in the assumption that in Navajo, as in English, argument positions not occupied by some free lexical item must be occupied categorically by an EC. It examines patterns of and constraints on nominals with relation to the relative clause, theory concerning argumental pronouns, the syntactic status of nominals, and the internal syntax of relatives. It is concluded that Navajo relatives are neither "headless" nor "internally headed" but have overt pronominal heads, are adjuncts to main clause pronouns, and create no problems for Binding theory or the 0-criterion. (MSE)