Results 1 to 4 of 4
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Apr 2012
    • Posts: 184
    #1

    Where is "that"?

    eg. The targets could include military headquarters, command centers, as well as missile and rocket launch sites the US says were tied to the chemical munitions.

    1.Why "that" can be intentionally erased, with the insert "the US says"?

    eg. It's protesting the exposure of women's
    skin during the competition which it says violates Muslim teachings.

    2. In the 2nd sentence, can "which" be erased?
    Last edited by michael147; 28-Aug-2013 at 08:15.

  1. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 24,983
    #2

    Re: Where is "that"?

    Quote Originally Posted by michael147 View Post
    eg. The targets could include military headquarters, command centers, as well as missile and rocket launch sites the US says were tied to the chemical munitions.

    1.Why "that" can be intentionally erased, with the insert "the US says"?

    eg. It's protesting the exposure of women's
    skin during the competition which it says violates Muslim teachings.

    2. In the 2nd sentence, can "which" be erased?
    This is an excellent question and it is not easy to answer. First, let me say that there is no question that "that" can be eliminated from the first sentence. There is also no question that "which" is need for comprehension of the second question. In general, we can eliminate relative pronouns when they are not the subjects of the clauses. The two sentences have similar but not identical structures. In the first, the relative clause begins with "the US says" and then follows with a verb in the passive voice. In the second sentence, the relative clause starts with "which it says" and then follows with a verb in the active voice. That is one difference. Also, the relative clause in the first sentence is a defining clause. In the second sentence, I would classify the relative clause as non-defining because it follows "competition" which is not defined by the following clause. If the following clause defines anything, it is "exposure".

    This is further complicated by the two phrases: "the US says" and "it says". One could argue that neither phrase is critical to its sentence. So let's look at the sentences without those phrases.

    The targets could include military headquarters, command centers, as well as missile and rocket launch sites (that) were tied to the chemical munitions.

    It's protesting the exposure of women's skin during the competition which violates Muslim teachings.

    Now it is clear that the "that" in the first sentence and "which" in the second sentence are essential. It is even clearer that the clause in the first sentence is defining and the clause in the second sentence is non-defining.

    So to sum, it up, I think that the major differences in the two clauses are defining versus non-defining and the additions of the almost parenthetical phrases "the US says" and "it says". In my view, the answer lies with both of these, but I can't be more specific.

    Perhaps one of my colleagues can do better.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Apr 2012
    • Posts: 184
    #3

    Re: Where is "that"?

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeNewYork View Post
    This is an excellent question and it is not easy to answer. First, let me say that there is no question that "that" can be eliminated from the first sentence. There is also no question that "which" is need for comprehension of the second question. In general, we can eliminate relative pronouns when they are not the subjects of the clauses. The two sentences have similar but not identical structures. In the first, the relative clause begins with "the US says" and then follows with a verb in the passive voice. In the second sentence, the relative clause starts with "which it says" and then follows with a verb in the active voice. That is one difference. Also, the relative clause in the first sentence is a defining clause. In the second sentence, I would classify the relative clause as non-defining because it follows "competition" which is not defined by the following clause. If the following clause defines anything, it is "exposure".

    This is further complicated by the two phrases: "the US says" and "it says". One could argue that neither phrase is critical to its sentence. So let's look at the sentences without those phrases.

    The targets could include military headquarters, command centers, as well as missile and rocket launch sites (that) were tied to the chemical munitions.

    It's protesting the exposure of women's skin during the competition which violates Muslim teachings.

    Now it is clear that the "that" in the first sentence and "which" in the second sentence are essential. It is even clearer that the clause in the first sentence is defining and the clause in the second sentence is non-defining.

    So to sum, it up, I think that the major differences in the two clauses are defining versus non-defining and the additions of the almost parenthetical phrases "the US says" and "it says". In my view, the answer lies with both of these, but I can't be more specific.

    Perhaps one of my colleagues can do better.
    You mean that "that" can be removed from the first sentence because the passive voice makes "that" not the subject in the clause?

    By the way thank you for correcting the 2nd sentence into non-defining. This is from radio.
    Last edited by michael147; 29-Aug-2013 at 01:22.

  2. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 24,983
    #4

    Re: Where is "that"?

    Quote Originally Posted by michael147 View Post
    You mean that "that" can be removed from the first sentence because the passive voice makes "that" not the subject in the clause?

    By the way thank you for correcting the 2nd sentence into non-defining. This is from radio.
    Only partially. In the passive voice the natural subject becomes the object. But if one removes "the US says", "'that" becomes the grammatical subject and cannot be removed.

    Thanks for the information about radio.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17-Sep-2012, 04:23
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-Jul-2012, 19:53
  3. [Vocabulary] How do you pronounce "Cotton", "Button", "Britain", "Manhattan"...
    By Williamyh in forum Pronunciation and Phonetics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-Dec-2009, 09:36
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-Sep-2008, 08:27
  5. confusing words "expressed" or "express" and "named" or"names"
    By Dawood Usmani in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 26-Oct-2007, 19:33

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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