[Grammar] Why shouldn't "what" introduce relative clauses?

[corum]

'what she is saying' was correctly identified as an object of 'in' by Pokemon. I wouldn't call it a clause, as it can't stand alone: *What she is saying. It is a compound noun..

Pedroski, you are a veritable wonder in the annals of linguistic sophistry. I rarely witness so much nonsense argued with confidence from the very same individual, day in, day out. Bravo!

Sober yourself up with some basic grammar here:

A dependent clause (also subordinate clause) is a clause used in conjunction with the independent clause, augmenting or attributing it. Dependent clauses cannot stand alone as a sentence; instead, they always modify the independent clause of a sentence

Dependent clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tdol]

I wouldn't call it a clause, as it can't stand alone:

This is an idiosyncratic definition of a clause- does this mean that subordinate clauses are not clauses.

 

[Pokemon]

Please you do not! :-D

If you don't like my posts you don't have to read them.

 

[corum]

If you don't like my posts you don't have to read them.

I do not like some of your posts. How do I know before I have read them which ones are not close to my heart?

 

[Pokemon]

I do not like some of your posts. How do I know before I have read them which ones are not close to my heart?

I see. You must have received a notification from Tdol. See you later.

 

[corum]

I see. You must have received a notification from Tdol. See you later.

I did not. Mind you, this is not a chat site.

 

[lauralie2]

I was sad to read that my post had caused such strife. My heartfelt apologies to all concerned.

 

[Tdol]

The thread's generating, in George Galloway's words, more heat than light, so I am closing it.