Hi first post here, hope to be here for awhile. To get straight to the point- I have a Q about relative clauses and the omission of relative pronouns in speech. I am desperate to get an answer for this one, yes I have tried searching on the net, but have been unsuccessful.
The rule is that if the relative pronoun refers back to the subject of the sentence, it may not be omitted, but if it refers back to the object, it may.
The rule seemed to work fine until I came up with these examples:
*The man who is wearing the glasses looked at me--> The man wearing the glasses looked at me
*The house that is on the corner is mine --> The house on the corner is mine
The relative pronoun may be omitted in the above sentences but still make perfect sense. But in this case, if I'm not mistaken, the relative pronoun in each of these sentences refers to the subject. It seems like the word 'is' is the culprit that is making me pull hairs out, what are your explanations for this, teachers???
Thanks!