Which one is the antecedent of the relative clause?

[Justin_Huang]

(1) The parts of the printers we purchased last month are pricey.
(2) The parts of the printers that we purchased last month are pricey.
(3) The parts of the printers which we purchased last month are pricey.

Please teach me how native speakers recognize the antecedent from each of the sentences. Which one did we bought last month, the parts of the printers or the printers? Which one is pricey?

Thank you.

[Dozy]

All of the sentences must mean that the parts are pricey. They cannot be parsed like "The parts of [the printers we purchased last month are pricey]."

To me, the use of "are" suggests that the parts are pricey now, so the printers, not the parts, were bought last month. However, if that were the case then you would say "The parts for the printers we purchased last month are pricey." And if you meant that you bought a bunch of parts last month then you would usually say "The printer parts we purchased last month were pricey." Your sentences seem to fall somewhere between two stools and do not seem completely satisfactory to me. The use or non-use of "that" or "which" doesn't noticeably affect my interpretation of this aspect.

[Justin_Huang]

Hi Dozy,

My understanding is that you would parse the sentences like this:
[The parts of [the printers we purchased last month] ] are pricey.

And you suggested that it is better to replace of with for. I cannot completely comprehand it. Can I say that the preposition "for" presents a looser connection for the two nouns, the parts and the printers, so that normal readers won't try to parse it like the below one?
[ [The parts for the printers] we purchased last month] are pricey.

In math, we know that '*' and '/' have higher priority than '+' and '-' to associate their operands. In English, it seems there are rules like this to decide how a sentence can be parsed. At least, from your explanation, I made a 'rule' like this:
Provide that
(A). Componund nouns without preposition.
(B). A componund noun with 'of'. (xxx of xxx)
(C). An antecedent and its relative clause.
(D). A componund noun with 'for'. (xxx for xxx)

Rule 1: (A) > (B) (C) > (D)
Rule 2: (B) > (C) or (B) < (C), depends on context.

Is that always the case? Or we should always consider the context before deciding how to parse a sentence?

[Dozy]

As far as I can think, "The A of the B that we purchased last month is/are X" usually means that B was purchased last month, and A is a component part that was necessarily purchased at the same time. Now you want to say something about the current state of A, specifically. For example:

"The hard disk of the computer that I bought last month is faulty."
"The legs of the trousers that I bought last month are too long."

"The A for the B that we purchased last month is/are X" seems to more often mean that A was purchased last month, and B is/was obtained separately or is not in one's possession:

"The frames for the pictures that we purchased last month aren't ready yet."

No doubt there are exceptions to the above that would need to be examined on a case by case basis.

[E2e4]

"The printer parts we purchased last month were pricey".

Why "printer" and not "printers"? Thanks

[Beeesneees]

'printer' is adjectival here. Parts is plural.
_________________
Cheers m' dears!