that or which

Forums: English, Grammar, Esl, Mctag, Relative Pronouns
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Just to ensure that I understand correctly restrictive clauses, can someone confirm the use of 'which' in the following, as well as a word check:
"You will manage your own workload, with support from your mentor, your
co-workers and others. {is it co-workers or coworkers} We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you." {which is correct? And, is there a comma after you?} thank you!

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 3 • Views: 4,421 • Replies: 43

No top replies

@luxechick,

Quote:

….confirm the use of 'which' ….

I'd have used "that" but don't ask me why. Maybe if flows off the tongue more easily. However I'd then eliminate the previous "that"

Quote:

"You will manage your own workload, with support from your mentor, your
co-workers and others. {is it co-workers or coworkers}

[It's the first, if for no other reason than an instantaneous reaction that some of us might ork the cows]

Quote:

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you." {which is correct? And, is there a comma after you?}

[I wouldn't use one there but then I wouldn't use the "you" either]

I might have even written "…that challenge without overwhelming," but that's just me

Quote:

thank you!

You're welcome Chick for what it's worth

A comma after "Chick" might dispel any notion that "Chick" is a verb, that some of us might Chick like crazy for what it's worth

0 Replies

@luxechick,

co-workers
which
no comma

0 Replies

@luxechick,

Quote:

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you

Either 'that' or 'which' can be used there, LC.

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences that/which challenge you

1 Reply

@JTT,

What are these, demonstrative pronouns?

Something (not a rule, obviously) tells me that one would normally use "which" over "that" if the noun one is replacing is the subject of the sentence.

Which it is in this case. Admittedly I'm a bit old-fashioned.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

Something (not a rule, obviously) tells me that one would normally use "which" over "that" if the noun one is replacing is the subject of the sentence.

I wonder what it is that tells you that, McTag. And I wonder why you would think that anyone should listen to something that/which is not a rule.

If one or the other is used more commonly then we would have to discern why in order to offer advice that could be considered appropriate.

1 Reply

@JTT,

I didn't get where I am today by being appropriate. However you should look further into this.
I did, and there are three pages on this point in the Oxford Guide to English Usage, from which these extracts are taken:
"Which is almost always used in non-restrictive clauses"
..."The use of that in non-restrictive clauses should be avoided. It is not uncommon in informal speech, and is sometimes employed by good writers to suggest a tone of familiarity...."
"It should not, however, be used in ordinary prose."

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

I didn't get where I am today by being appropriate.

I've noticed that, but the issue wasn't 'you' being appropriate, it was your advice being appropriate.

However, I am pleased to see you offering source material and discussion on the particular language issue.

"... We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which/that challenge you, without overwhelming you."

But you should look further into restrictive vs non-restrictive relative clauses and what they actually mean. The advice from Oxford is appropriate when the clause is a non-restrictive one. That is not the case here.

The "experiences" are not ones that will excite you beyond belief, disappoint you or provide something else to fulfill any other imaginable scenario. They are limited, restricted to 'experiences' that/which will "challenge you, without overwhelming you".

That is why both 'that' and 'which' work in this situation - because it is a restrictive relative clause.

Quote:

M-W

Definition of RESTRICTIVE CLAUSE
: a descriptive clause that is essential to the definiteness of the word it modifies (as that you ordered in “the book that you ordered is out of print”)

1 Reply

@JTT,

I think you've got that arsy-versy.

"The general rule is that which is used in relative clauses to which the readers' attention is to be drawn, while that is used in clauses which mention what is already known or does not need special emphasis."

It appears to me that special emphasis is being made here. This is a non-restrictive clause. It adds further information about the antecedent, the "experiences".

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

I think you've got that arsy-versy.

"The general rule is that which is used in relative clauses to which the readers' attention is to be drawn, while that is used in clauses which mention what is already known or does not need special emphasis."

That's not the "general" rule at all, McTag. Where did you get this notion from?

Quote:

It appears to me that special emphasis is being made here. This is a non-restrictive clause. It adds further information about the antecedent, the "experiences".

1. "We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you."

2. "We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences."

Do you know what kind of experiences are being discussed or envisioned in 2.?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Where did you get this notion from?

It is a direct quotation from the Oxford usage book mentioned above.

Quote:

Do you know what kind of experiences are being discussed or envisioned in 2.?

No, and that is why the additional clause, which adds information, is a non-restrictive clause as defined (in the same publication).

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

It is a direct quotation from the Oxford usage book mentioned above.

Oxford: "The general rule is that 'which' is used in relative clauses to which the readers' attention is to be drawn, while 'that' is used in clauses which mention what is already known or does not need special emphasis."

I truly hope that you have quoted it out of context. As it stands it's pretty much a mindless quotation.

Both THAT and WHICH are used in restrictive relative clauses.

-------------
M-W: restrictive clause
a descriptive clause that is essential to the definiteness of the word it modifies (as that you ordered in “the book that you ordered is out of print”)

----------------------

WHICH is used in non-restrictive relative clauses.

Non-restrictive relative clauses are used to add extra information about a noun referent but that information is not essential in determining which item is being described.

Quote:

No, and that is why the additional clause, which adds information, is a non-restrictive clause as defined (in the same publication).

All relative clauses add information. Some is essential to meaning and some is superfluous addition.

The pen that/which I'm holding is blue. This pen, which has a name embossed on it, was swiped from McTag's desk.

In the first sentence of the above, THAT or WHICH are used as relative pronouns heading the restrictive relative clause "I'm holding". That clause is essential to defining or limiting the discussion to a certain pen. It restricts our focus to the pen "I'm holding". That's why it is a restrictive clause.

In the second sentence of the above, WHICH heads the non-restrictive relative clause, "has a name embossed on it", which is extra, unnecessary information which is not essential to determining the pen in question. That non-restrictive phrase could be dropped without affecting anyone's knowledge as to which pen is under discussion.

We know it is non-restrictive because non-restrictive clauses are put in commas and their head relative pronoun is almost always WHICH.

That is the "general" rule followed by all native speakers of English.

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you."

"experiences" is limited by the restrictive relative clause, which is headed in this particular case by WHICH, to those that "challenge you". Without that restrictive clause we wouldn't know the limit on the 'experiences'.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

We know it is non-restrictive because non-restrictive clauses are put in commas and their head relative pronoun is almost always WHICH.

That is the "general" rule followed by all native speakers of English.

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you."

That's what I said.

Use which.

Thank you.

1 Reply

The man that I am going to see has a dog.

The dog, which is a collie, is going to have pups.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

That's what I said.

Use which.

That was advice that was not appropriate. It was wrong because it was based on a poor understanding of relative pronouns/clauses.

1 Reply

@McTag,

The man that/who I am going to see has a dog. The dog, which is a collie, is going to have pups.

In your example, the first relative clause is restrictive because it is needed to define the man. The dog is amply covered by 'a', we know which dog, which leads the second relative clause to be a non-restrictive clause. But this example isn't at all like the OP's.

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you.

There is no introduction to 'experiences'. The first mention comes with a following restrictive clause that is needed to let the reader/listener know the parameters of the 'experiences'. These 'experiences' are limited/restricted to ones that "challenge you".

Quote:

Something (not a rule, obviously) tells me that one would normally use "which" over "that" if the noun one is replacing is the subject of the sentence.

There is no such rule, guideline, absolutely nothing in the history of the English language that I'm aware of that suggests this.

Quote:

Which it is in this case. Admittedly I'm a bit old-fashioned.

We will ensure that you are presented with quality experiences which challenge you, without overwhelming you.

The "noun one is replacing" is most assuredly NOT "the subject of the sentence".

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

That was advice that was not appropriate. It was wrong

It was right. Look at your own post.
You are going round in circles.

1 Reply

@McTag,

When you can identify the subject of a sentence, or when you have approached the state of having the foggiest notion on relative clauses, maybe then we can chat.

1 Reply

@JTT,

And there I was thinking that the supercilious, patronising and peevish posts were becoming fewer.

I'm glad though, that you have come around to agreeing that "which" is the correct choice here.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

And there I was thinking that the supercilious, patronising and peevish posts were becoming fewer.

Quote:

It was right. Look at your own post.
You are going round in circles.

Two fine examples of "supercilious, patronising and peevish posts".

When you can identify the subject of a sentence, or when you have approached the state of having the foggiest notion on relative clauses, maybe then we can chat.

1 Reply

that or which

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know