Results 1 to 4 of 4
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • Canada

    • Join Date: Dec 2008
    • Posts: 177
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #1

    Relative Clause Omission Rule

    Example sentences:

    A lawyer is a person who works in the justice system and [who] represents people in court.

    A lawyer is a person who works in the justice system and [who] does not have the power to sentence offenders.

    A concubine is a woman who is a mistress and [who] does not have the same status as the official wife.

    *Note: Please ignore the content of the sentences (I hastily put them together.).

    Questions:

    Is the "who" in red necessary? I see that sometimes "who" is repeated and sometimes not.

    When would you say that I need to put it? I am assuming that it is a matter of clarity. Is it better to have it than not?

    Thanks in advance.
    Last edited by vcolts; 11-Dec-2011 at 06:24.

  1. JohnParis's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired Academic
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 774
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #2

    Re: Relative Clause Omission Rule

    [who] is not necessary in any of your sentences. They are quite clear without [who].

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • Canada

    • Join Date: Dec 2008
    • Posts: 177
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #3

    Re: Relative Clause Omission Rule

    I am kinda wondering about that as well.

    Is the "who" necessary for the third sentence because the form of the verb in use is different?

  2. JohnParis's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired Academic
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 774
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #4

    Re: Relative Clause Omission Rule

    In my opinion, I still believe that the second who in the third sentence is superfluous and stilted.
    What are your comments on:
    A concubine is a woman who is a mistress who does not have the same status as the official wife.

Similar Threads

  1. [Grammar] omission rule
    By vcolts in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 13-Dec-2011, 16:08
  2. [Grammar] Omission/Reduction Rule
    By vcolts in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18-Nov-2011, 17:34
  3. [Grammar] Omission Rule?
    By vcolts in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 26-Oct-2011, 00:20
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 27-Apr-2010, 15:13
  5. Exception to the rule? Omission of relative pronoun
    By Federerexpress in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 23-Jan-2010, 14:57

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •