What's the best movie that/which you've ever seen?

[sitifan]

1. What's the best movie that you've ever seen?
2. What's the best movie which you've ever seen?
According to Xuan Yuanyou Grammar (page 452), the above sentences are both acceptable. Is #2 really acceptable to native speakers?

 

[emsr2d2]

Increasingly, yes. I would use only "that" in that sentence but I'm aware that the distinction between "that" and "which" is becoming more and more blurred all the time. Bear in mind, though, that many native speakers, including me, would use neither there.

What's the best film you've ever seen?

 

[sitifan]

3. It was a can of peaches that your friend bought at a 7-11 last night.
4. It was a can of peaches which your friend bought at a 7-11 last night.
According to Xuan Yuanyou Grammar (page 441), the above sentences are both acceptable. Is #4 really acceptable to native speakers?

 

[emsr2d2]

Sentence 4 needs a comma after "peaches".

 

[kadioguy]

Sentence 4 needs a comma after "peaches".

Mr. Xuan Yuan-You thinks that Sentences 3 and 4 are both cleft sentences and can be interchangeable. Do you agree with him?

 

[sitifan]

5. It was at a 7-11 that your friend bought a can of peaches last night.
6. It was at a 7-11 where your friend bought a can of peaches last night.
According to Xuan Yuanyou Grammar (page 442), the above sentences are both acceptable. Is #6 really acceptable to native speakers?

 

[Rover_KE]

No.

 

[kadioguy]

No. People normally use that, who, or whose in cleft sentences; they seldom use whom, which, where or when.

Let's wait for native speakers to confirm that.

 

[jutfrank]

I think sentence 2 is very unnatural. In superlative sentences like that, we use that not which.

 

[slevlife]

3. It was a can of peaches that your friend bought at a 7-11 last night.
4. It was a can of peaches which your friend bought at a 7-11 last night.

Sentence 4 needs a comma after "peaches".

sitifan, note that these sentences can be interpreted in two different ways. Using a comma with sentence 4 is not only preferred (though IMO optional), but also guides our brains into the meaning that/which -)) works best with which.

Meaning 1: [I’m making a assertion that] a can of peaches is the thing that your friend bought at a 7-11 last night.
With this meaning, that is more correct (though you could get away with which due to the blurring that is increasingly occurring), and you cannot use a comma. That starts a defining clause.

Meaning 2: It was a can of peaches, [and I'm adding the related or clarifying detail that] your friend bought it at a 7-11 last night.
With this meaning, which is more correct (though you can get away with that) since it starts a non-defining clause. A comma must be avoided if you use that (don't ask me why) but is preferred if you use which.

5. It was at a 7-11 that your friend bought a can of peaches last night.
6. It was at a 7-11 where your friend bought a can of peaches last night.

Sentence 5 identifies the place your friend bought the can as a 7-11 (we don't know which one). Using where for this meaning is incorrect, but you might hear it sometimes.

If you change "a 7-11" to "the 7-11," both sentences can be valid and share the same meaning if used in the right context. They would identify which 7-11 the speaker is talking about.

 

[Rover_KE]

For the benefit of those who might never have heard of them, a 7-11 is one of a group of multinational convenience stores.

 

[kadioguy]

5. It was at a 7-11 that your friend bought a can of peaches last night.
6. It was at a 7-11 where your friend bought a can of peaches last night.

According to Xuan Yuanyou Grammar (page 442), the above sentences are both acceptable. Is #6 really acceptable to native speakers?

A friend told me, "I can answer the question myself by saying that Sentence 6 is definitely acceptable to me as a native. Whether it's incorrect I don't really have enough formal experience to say, but it does sound noticeably less preferable to me in formal writing."

 

[emsr2d2]

I think your friend was carefully sitting on the fence on this one. They said it was acceptable but didn't know if it was wrong. I have no idea what they meant by "it does sound noticeably less preferable ... in formal writing"!

Their opening statement brings us to the nub of your question. Do you want to know if it's "acceptable" (native speakers might use it and those that hear it wouldn't instantly question it, and would understand the meaning) or if it's "correct" (you could use it in an exam and it wouldn't be marked as wrong)?

 

[kadioguy]

I have no idea what they meant by "it does sound noticeably less preferable ... in formal writing"!

I take it to mean "Sentence 6 reads okay to me, but I wouldn't use it in formal writing, where Sentence 5 would be the best bet."