Re: A language issue (comment)
As a graduate student at U. of Kansas
('59-'63), I helped Jim and Rowena Peoples edit manuscripts submitted to the
Journal of Geophysical Research. Rowena taught me more about correct grammar and
word usage than any English teacher I ever had. That-which misuse was
probably the most prevalent slip of the pen she caught.
All guides to good word usage tell us that the
choice between these two relative pronouns is bound up with the distinction
between restrictive clauses (those that define and limit what precedes by
providing information necessary to full understanding) and nonrestrictive ones.
Robert Claiborne in Saying What You Mean says:
"That goes only with restrictive
clauses (those not set off with commas, as in the girl that I married).
Which, on the other hand, has for centuries been used with both kinds
of clauses, the commas alone marking the distinction. Which is required
in restrictive clauses following an earlier that (the love that
dares not speak its name, but that love which dares not
speak its name).
"Since it's the commas that really do the job,
and can muddle your meaning if you misuse them, the main value of the rather
nebulous that/which distinction is that it forces you to think about
whether your clause is or isn't restrictive--that is, whether the commas are
needed. If you get the commas right, you can use which (or who
if you're talking about people) on any occasion.
"Note, too, that that can often be
dropped entirely (the girl I married)--which is one less decision
(that) you'll have to make."
Harry Shaw in Dictionary of Problem Words
and Expressions adds:
"That is often used in illiterate or
wordy expressions. 'That there child' is both wordy and illiterate.
'That is to say' is a wordy way to express 'I mean' or
'namely.'
"That and which (especially
which) are often used in such a way as to create doubt about the
antecedent. Avoid saying, for example, 'They are coming if their daughter is
well enough, which I doubt,' because the which has no definite
antecedent. Say, instead, '. . . is well enough. However, I doubt that she will
be.' "
As John Chiordi used to say in his essays on
NPR, "Good words to you."
Paul O. Johnson
Collin County College
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 12:16
PM
Subject: A language issue
(comment)
> I think I'm too old to understand the
nuances here, but as I
> originally wrote the clause, it was jarring to
reread. That "which"
> just doesn't seem to belong, and it is distracting,
to me at least.
> I tried to read Fowler's on this issue but it is too
difficult for
> me to follow. I do get the idea that the issue is
confused, and
> that hard rules are difficult to formulate in this
case.
>
> It is certainly important that we be sensitive to
language in our
> teaching. I am curious about others' opinions on the
clarity of the
> particular clause under scrutiny here, but I do not wish
to ignite
> a firestorm of grammarian-antigrammarian rage.
>
> Leigh