A little question about relative pronouns

[Zed]

Hi there people.

I know this isn't the ideal place to ask this, but I haven't been able to find an answer for a couple of hours now, so I thought I might give it a shot.

I am helping one of my nephews with some English homework and I'm a bit puzzled about one thing related to relative pronouns. The thing is, there is a part where he is supposed to "fill in" the missing word from a number of sentences in a given text. The part that is causing me some confusion is this:

"The vast area that comprises Central and South America is ____________ the Maya civilization, ___________ was one of the greatest in the world history, can be found. The reason ___________ it collapsed is still shrouded in mystery..."

I have the feeling that in the second line "which" (a relative pronoun) is appropriate, but on the other two it seems no relative pronoun (who, which, that) really fits in, but if I put "where" and "why" respectively it kind of makes sense, right? Yet it seems neither where or why (or when) are considered relative pronouns. Maybe I'm just not seeing something, or is the homework actually "flawed"?

I'll appreciate any help you can give me guys.

Have a nice day.

EDIT: The question is already answered, but I wrote "personal" instead of "relative" in the last paragraph. I know it didn't make a difference, but fixed regardless.

[YukiHerz]

From this page.
"Here is the list. The relative pronouns are:
that
which
whom
who
whoever
whomever
whichever"

If it came from a spanish-talking country, it's probably flawed, myself and a lot of people from other countries I know had to pretty much force themselves to do tests in deliberately broken english, because our actual english was better than that of the teachers.

[Tristan]

I think it's flawed. I can't think of anything that would be better suited than where, which, that in those gaps respectively.

And just to add to why I think it's flawed: One of the greatest in the world history.* (or the world's history.)

[Zed]

Thanks for the list. I already saw that ones too, but it seems the rest of them (which I didn't include in my first post) are just variations of which and who. But anyway, thanks again.

Yes, I'm from Mexico so what you said is probably what's happening. I just thought that not being a native speaker myself I was just missing something.

@ErisFalling: Thanks for the confirmation.

EDIT: And you're right about "that", didn't see that one.

[Tracer]

I would say where, which, and that.

[Gez]

I'm in the Where Which Why camp myself.

And yeah, neither "where" nor "why" are pronouns of any sort, since they don't stand for a noun. They instead stand for an adverb, which makes them pro-adverbs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-form

[pritch]

It is where, which and why.

I have a MA in English so if the teacher disagrees tell them this forum guy from England officially overrules them :P

Oh and btw, in your original post you should say "neither where nor why are considered relative pronouns"

/smartass ;)

http://youfailit.net/qdb/?170

[Zed]

pritch said:

It is where, which and why.

I have a MA in English so if the teacher disagrees tell them this forum guy from England officially overrules them :P

Oh and btw, in your original post you should say "neither where nor why are considered relative pronouns"

/smartass ;)

http://youfailit.net/qdb/?170

Well, I ended up using "that" in the last one, but I think it'll be fine.

And thanks a lot for the correction, I didn't notice that.