[Grammar] for the form of which

[kadioguy]

grammar
n.

Etymology: < Old French gramaire (French grammaire), an irregular semipopular adoption (for the form of which compare Old French mire representing Latin medicum, artimaire representing Latin artem magicam or mathematicam) of Latin grammatica, ...

(Quoted from the Oxford English Dictionary)

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

I don't understand why the writer used which there. The first word that came to my mind to use there was it.

a. for the form of which compare Old French mire

b. for the form of it compare Old French mire

What different effect exists between them?

 

[Raymott]

To use 'it', you'd need a new sentence.
"Here is a new building, which has the shape of a pyramid."
"Here is a new building. It has the shape of a pyramid." Two sentences.
"Here is a new building, the shape of which is a pyramid."
"Here is a new building. The shape of it is a pyramid. Two sentences.

 

[kadioguy]

Thank you, Raymott.

But in the original text there isn't any other verb before "which". I mean, there is only one verb "compare" in the original, so "for the form of it compare Old French mire" would still be grammatical.

Or do you see it this way:

Etymology: It came/comes from ("<") Old French gramaire (French grammaire), an irregular semipopular adoption (for the form of which compare Old French mire ...


Then we'll get two verbs and "which" will be necessary.

 

[Raymott]

Do you mean no noun? "Which" doesn't need a verb before it. Yes, that's how I see it.

 

[kadioguy]

Do you mean no noun?

I mean, normally the part before 'which' is a sentence, as in your examples. However, it seems that it is not the case in the original. So I tried to find a solution in post #3.

 

[kadioguy]

I mean, normally the part before 'which' is a sentence, as in your examples. However, it seems that it is not the case in the original. So I tried to find a solution in post #3.

I just thought of another way to see it:

an irregular semipopular adoption (for the form of which compare Old French mire ...

The pattern is similar to this:

a book (for the kind of which I'd love to pay)

So in this pattern the part before 'which' can be just a noun (the text in red). What do you think?