In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and "Where" are used similarly. I show here an examlpe:
"The vilage is not far from here. I has many beautiful views"
I wrote it into:
1. The village Which has many beautiful views is not far from here
2. The village Where has many beautiful views is not far from here
I think the second one is not very correct.
So when should we use "Which"? When should we use "Where"?
("The village" is understood as a position or a item?)
Thanks!
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
'Where' is used with the idea of 'in/at which'.
Meonstoke is the village where I grew up
Meonstoke is the village (which) I grew up in.
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
The only complaint that I would have with the example given is that 'which I grew up in' is restrictive. Stating 'Meonstoke is the village' is incomplete without the clause, so 'that' should be used in place of 'which': 'Meonstoke is the village that I grew up in.'
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
Quote:
Originally Posted by
William Jones 
The only complaint that I would have with the example given is that 'which I grew up in' is restrictive. Stating 'Meonstoke is the village' is incomplete without the clause, so 'that' should be used in place of 'which': 'Meonstoke is the village that I grew up in.'
In British English, 'which' is fine.
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
Truly? I knew that in some writing, generally biblical, it isn't uncommon for 'which' to be used in place of 'that' for prosody, but I didn't know that they were equivalent in British English.
I appreciate the information.
J. Jones
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
I don't know enough about American English to make sweeping statements, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the 'rule' about using 'that' instead of 'which' in restrictive/defining relative clauses was invented by the sort of writer who abhors split infinitives and thinks that a preposition is something you can't end a sentence with.
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
Indeed. Probably one of those batty Latinists.
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
I like my "thats" restrictive and my "whiches" unrestrictive, and I am happy to boldy go forth, and you'd be a guy I'd be happy to go with.
Was it EVER the rule? Because I really do find using "which" for a restrictive clause grating. So either some teacher taught me something that was overly prescripting and not really correct way back when, or it's another one of those regional things.
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
Quote:
Originally Posted by
William Jones Indeed. Probably one of those batty Latinists.
Batty as in "crazy" or "blind"?
Re: In using relative clause,sometimes I see that the relative pronouns "Which" and
Well, Strunk and White's The Elements of Style certainly list it as a rule, and that's one of the most well respected guides for writers in America. And Fowler states in his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage that "The kinds of relative clause, to one of which that & to the other of which which is appropriate, are the defining & the non-defining; & if writers would agree to regard that as the defining relative pronoun & which as the non-defining, there would be much gain both in lucidity & in ease." He does also mention that this problem is more common in the English of England than in American English. American English tends to ascribe a learnedness to the use of which and a colloquial quality to that.
