English Grammar

B

BlueSpud

Registered User
Messages
879
Which of the following is more correct, or is one of them plainly incorrect?

a) I have a number of issues that I want to address.

b) I have a number of issues which I want to address.

[Edited by DrMoriarty - title changed from 'grammer' to 'grammar' ;-) ]
 
Re: English Grammer

If you type both sentences into a word doc, the grammar checker underlines 'issues which' and suggests changing it to either 'issues that' or 'issues, which' so to me it seems that 'issues that' is more correct.

Does that make sense???
 
Re: English Grammer

aonfocaleile said:
If you type both sentences into a word doc, the grammar checker underlines 'issues which' and suggests changing it to either 'issues that' or 'issues, which' so to me it seems that 'issues that' is more correct.

Does that make sense???
Click to expand...

Thanks, it does, however, I never take what the Word spell/grammer checker says as gospel. I am hoping someone who knows their grammer well can direct me, as I am writing a document where this arises a number of times & I would like to have it spot on......
 
IMHO, you should use that over which. I can't detail why - it just sounds right.

And I agree with not relying on the MS Word grammar check - it is not 100% reliable.
 
Yes, both are correct. The more pedantic English speakers would use "which" but nowadays both are in common usage.

However, technically "that" is correct, as it defines the issues you are talking about. Personally, I'd use it (I think which sounds and reads odd here), but it's up to you.
 
That defintitely sounds right which doesnt sound right but I wouldnt say its incorrect necessarily
 
Thanks for the input guys, I am going with "which", which I prefer, even if it seems less popular.
 
Hi BlueSpud, you could always simply leave out the "that" or "which", the sentence still makes sense. Or, you could rephrase and say "There are a number of issues I want to address" :)
 
Shoegal is right you know.

Put it this way, the "that" puts more emphasis on the issues. Does that make sense?
 
These are some notes which I compiled some time ago for internal use in a magazine that I was involved in.

The car was written off.

The car, which I bought last year, was written off.
(Non- restrictive clause. Supplementary information.)


The car which I bought last year was written off.
or
The car that I bought last year was written off.

(Restrictive It was the car I bought last year as distinct from my other cars.)


Salaries, which are paid monthly, are augmented by various fringe benefits. (i.e. all salaries are augmented by fringe benefits )

Salaries which are paid monthly are augmented by various fringe benefits. ( only monthly salaries are augmented by fringe benefits)


It seems safer to always use which or who.

That can refer to people and is useful for sentences like : “The children and boxes that were in the car” when it would be wrong to use who or which.


THAT cannot introduce a restrictive relative clause;

You cannot say: I saw the car, that was very fortunate.
It should be: I saw the car, which was very fortunate.
 
Brendan said:
Salaries, which are paid monthly, are augmented by various fringe benefits. (i.e. all salaries are augmented by fringe benefits )

Salaries which are paid monthly are augmented by various fringe benefits. ( only monthly salaries are augmented by fringe benefits)
Click to expand...

Sorry Brendan, but for the second example I would have used "Salaries that are paid monthly are augmented by various fringe benefits."

I did work for one company before that basically simplified the rule to: if the that/which needs a comma before it (i.e. it restricts or gives additional information) then use "which". If there's no comma, use that.

However, this was a style guide, which doesn't meant that either are incorrect.

We're not the only ones debating this, by the way:

http://www.dianahacker.com/writersref/subpages_language/thatwhich.html
 
SunSparks

No need at all to apologize.

The point of the example is the use of commas. Either is correct in my view. "That" might be better in spoken language as you can't hear commas.

Brendan
 
That's funny - given the initial example, I have also always wondered which option is correct.

In the case of the initial example, I always use 'which' instead of 'that', since 'that' just doesnt sound correct.

I'd love to hear a linguists technical explanation of which option is better.
 
I'd have thought that a) was the correct answer to BlueSpud's query, using Queens English. Using Hiberno-English I'd say it makes no odds. I always liked the following, about Egnilsh Splleing!

Aoccdrnig to a rscheeahcr at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe...

If you're really bored then see http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html
 
The issue of using "That" Vs "Which" is a typically troublesome expression and one that often confuses writers. Briefly, the general rule is

which informs; that defines.

According to the Chicago Manual of Style, the basic rule is to use “which” plus commas to set off nonrestrictive clauses; use “that” to introduce a restrictive clause.

In the example cited by the OP above,

a) I have a number of issues that I want to address.
b) I have a number of issues which I want to address.


I suggest you use (a) above, where the content that follows will define (or specify) those issue you wish to address.

I suggest you use (b) above, where you will speak generally but not specifically about the issues you wish to address.

The correct term to use therefore, will depend on the context of what follows after.

Further information about the use of "that" Vs "which" is set out in paragraphs 5.58–63 in the fifteenth edition of The Chicago Manual of Style.

The above might prove a useful reference tool.
 
And another ...

[broken link removed]

Non-defining relative clauses.

Non-defining relative clauses are special cases of parenthetic phrases. Note the difference compared with relative clauses that define the preceding noun phrase (i.e. ‘the translations’ or ‘the translation in the tray’ in the examples below):

The translations, which have been revised, can now be sent out.
(added detail — they have all been revised)

The translations which (or better: that) have been revised can now be sent out.
(defining the subset that is to be sent out — only those that have been revised are to be sent out)

Note also that the use of ‘which’ in defining relative clauses is often considered to be stilted and overly formal. ‘That’ reads more naturally. It also helps make the meaning clearer, reinforcing the lack of commas, since it is used as a relative pronoun only in defining clauses. Unlike ‘which’, however, ‘that’ needs to be close to the noun to which it refers...
Click to expand...


Marion
 
our esteemed taoiseach uses 'dat'. and look where it got him:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top