adjective clauses whitch / that

[SHAOLINONE]

hello I have any problem with ths words. in what moemnt I used which and when I used that . is possible explain about this

 

[riverkid]

hello I have any problem with these words. in what moment should I use which and when should I use that .
Is it possible for you to explain about this

Hi Shaolinone.

We use both for describing a noun, 'which' tends to be used in more formal situations and 'that' is used more often, especially in speech. When the noun has been sufficiently described that it's known to everyone, we switch to using 'which' only.

The pen that/which you're holding is John's. His pen, which is a beautiful shade of blue, was bought for him by his ex-wife.

The pen

 

[apex2000]

hello I have any problem with ths words. in what moemnt I used which and when I used that . is possible explain about this

First, your question:
I have a problem with these words. When should I use which and when that?

We have a problem with them, also. In so many circumstances they are interchangeable. Starting with 'that' this can be a demonstrative pronoun or adjective. We use it in circumstances where we wish to demonstrate something;

That man (over) there is taller than this one here.
That idea of yours is a good one.
That is a beautiful painting.

'Which' is an interrogative pronoun and adjective. We use it in circumstances where we wish to draw a distinction between things or ideas.

Which painting would you choose?
I do not know which to choose.
Which of the brothers do you like (the) best?

There was a time when I did not know which one to choose. There was a time when I did not know that I could choose either of them.

Do be careful with spelling. 'Whitch' is wrong. You could mean either witch or which. The former is a wicked old woman in fairy tales!

 

[godfingers]

that / which (restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses). The standard rule requires that you use that only to introduce a restrictive (or defining) relative clause, which identifies the person or thing being talked about; in this use it should never be preceded by a comma. Thus, in the sentence The house that Jack built has been torn down, the clause that Jack built is a restrictive clause telling which specific house was torn down. Similarly, in I am looking for a book that is easy to read, the restrictive clause that is easy to read tells what kind of book is desired.
[SIZE=-2]1[/SIZE] By contrast, you use which only with nonrestrictive (or nondefining) clauses, which give additional information about something that has already been identified in the context; in this use, which is always preceded by a comma. Thus you should say The students in Chemistry 101 have been complaining about the textbook, which (not that) is hard to follow. The clause which is hard to follow is nonrestrictive in that it does not indicate which text is being complained about; even if it were omitted, we would know that the phrase the textbook refers to the text in Chemistry 101. It should be easy to follow the rule in nonrestrictive clauses like this, since which here sounds more natural than that.

[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] Some people extend the rule and insist that, just as that should be used only in restrictive clauses, which should be used only in nonrestrictive clauses. By this thinking, you should avoid using which in sentences such as I need a book which will tell me all about city gardening, where the restrictive clause which will tell me all about city gardening describes what sort of book is needed. But this use of which with restrictive clauses is very common, even in edited prose. If you fail to follow the rule in this point, you have plenty of company. Moreover, there are some situations in which which is preferable to that. Which can be especially useful where two or more relative clauses are joined by and or or: It is a philosophy in which ordinary people may find solace and which many have found reason to praise. You may also want to use which to introduce a restrictive clause when the preceding phrase contains a that: We want to assign only that book which will be most helpful.

[SIZE=-2]3[/SIZE]omitting that. You can omit that in a relative clause when the subject of the clause is different from the word or phrase the clause refers to. Thus, you can say either the book that I was reading or the book I was reading. You can also omit that when it introduces a subordinate clause: I think we should try again. You should not omit that, however, when the subordinate clause begins with an adverbial phrase or anything other than the subject: She said that under no circumstances would she allow us to skip the meeting. The book argues that eventually the housing supply will increase. This last sentence would be ambiguous if that were omitted, since the adverb eventually could then be construed as modifying either argues or will increase.

[SIZE=-2]4[/SIZE]that instead of who. The man that wanted to talk to you just called back. Some people say that you can only use who and not that to introduce a restrictive relative clause that identifies a person. But that has been used in this way for centuries. It is a quintessential English usage, going back to the Old English period, and has been used by our best writers. So it is entirely acceptable to write either the man that wanted to talk to you or the man who wanted to talk to you.

Ruholla Kazemi
EFL Teacher
EAP Teacher
English Teacher Trainer

 

[SHAOLINONE]

ok I believe that I understand this.
for example:

The boy, which we saw him on the train, is standing over there.

The man, that his dog have been barkink all night, had agreed to take better control to take better control of his animals.

 

[riverkid]

that / which (restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses). The standard rule requires that you use that only to introduce a restrictive (or defining) relative clause, which identifies the person or thing being talked about; in this use it should never be preceded by a comma. Thus, in the sentence The house that Jack built has been torn down, the clause that Jack built is a restrictive clause telling which specific house was torn down. ...

There is no standard rule that says that, Godfinger. There is a prescription that has been around for some time that purports that that is how English works. It most definitely does not.

 

[Wuisi]

ok I believe that I understand this.
for example:

The boy, which we saw him on the train, is standing over there.

The man, that his dog have been barkink all night, had agreed to take better control to take better control of his animals.

Hi Shaolinone,
I'm afraid you don't have it right:--(. Let me try to help you;-);-). Unless I'm much mistaken your question is about relative clauses and the use of the relative pronouns 'that' and 'which'.
1) These relative sentences give the same kind of information about a noun as adjectives do, they help us to define that item in more detail: 'A man' but 'A tall man' -gives more information- and 'The tall man that came with a bag' -gives even more-, and 'The tall man that came with the bag that was full of magazines' -gives much more-. In this kind of relative clause you can use both 'who' (more formal) or 'that' as pronouns to connect the information you want to give with the noun you want to DEFINE by using a clause -a clause consists of, at least, subject and verb-. Sometimes the clause you use has its own subject -different from the noun you are defining- and then you can leave 'who' or 'that' out; as in 'The tall man (who/that) I met yesterday'. On some other ocassions the subject of that clause you want to use to define a noun is the same as the noun you are defining, and then you need 'who' or 'that', as in: The tall man who came yesterday. We call this kind 'DEFINING RELATIVE CLAUSES' because the information helps the speaker/writer to define that noun or noun group.
Ok, so far, then take a deep breath, write your own examples, and go on reading;-):
2) When the noun we are defining is not a person or group of people we can use 'which' (formal) or 'that' to connect the clause to the noun. Thus, OK, if you use 'that' they will always be fine. Again, write your own examples;-).
3) Don't forget that 'who', 'that' or 'which' in these sentences are pronouns. This means that we use them not to repeat a noun. Look at this:
The tall man that I phoned THE TALL MAN yesterday--> it is not OK because here 'that' and 'THE TALL MAN' are the same person (The man is tall. I phoned the tall man). OK, the same happens when you use 'him' instead of 'the tall man'--> 'The tall man that I phoned HIM yesterday' is not ok. Remember that you have 'THAT' meaning 'him' here so 'The tall man that I phoned yesterday' is ok. And still better, the information you give about this 'tall man' is the clause 'I phoned him'. This clause has its own subject 'I' that is different from 'the tall man' so we can say 'The tall man I phoned yesterday' and is ok.
Stand up, have a glass of water, write your own examples and go on reading;-).
4) Again, a sentence like 'The old chair which/that the old chair was next to the window' is not ok because here 'which/that' and 'the old chair' are the same thing. The correct one is 'The old chair which/that was next to the window'. And here you have to keep 'which' or 'that' because the clause you use to define that chair is 'the old chair was next to the window' and the subject in this clause has a subject 'the old chair' and it is the same as the noun you are defining. Ok, write some more examples, we are almost finished:lol:.
5) Sometimes you want to define a noun that needs no more information to be defined because it is already very well-defined. For example, 'George W. Bush'. Then we don't say 'George W. Bush that phoned yesterday lives in Washington', it is grammatically perfect but there is no need to give more information about that person to know who we are talking about. If we want we can say something extra, additional about him but what we say will not help us to define it. This are NON-DEFINING relative clauses and the extra information we give goes between commas (, ... ,). For them we need relative pronouns too, but only WHO for people and WHICH for the rest -there are some more but I think that's enough for today- and we can form sentences like, 'George W. Bush, who loves animals, lives in Washington'. In this non-defining you can't leave 'who' or 'which' out. And this is true not only for George W. Bush but also for Peter's father -even if you don't know Peter-, The Manager of Harrods, Tony or my sister's dog. They are all well-defined names and noun groups so we can't define them any further and the information we give about them is extra, additional, and goes between commas with who or which as a relative PRONOUNS. Write your own examples and let's finish:lol::lol::lol::
6) Here, again, remember they are pronouns so don't repeat the noun;-).

Thus, your examples should be:
The boy (who/that) we saw on the train is standing over there
The man WHOSE dog had been barking all night long agreed to control his animals better.

and further examples are:
My mother's neighbour, who can be exasperating, is coming for dinner.
The neighbour that we usually meet in the supermarket is pregnant again.
A dog that a lorry had run over helped to rescue a lost climber.
James's dog, which is as big as an armchair, ate his mobile phone.
If you have read this far and have understood half of it I will be more than happy. However, I do warn you I'm not a teacher.:-D:-D:-D
Bye.