Grammar question

[BlueSpud]

Which is more correct, if indeed one is more correct;

a) The box has a lid that kept things dry

OR

b) The box has a lid which kept things dry

 

[z109]

My understanding is that both can be correct, but have different meanings:
If the function of the lid was to keep the box dry, then that is correct. e.g. the box comes with a lid therefore things inside stay dry.

If the result of having a lid on the box is that the things were kept dry, then which can be used. e.g. as a result of having a lid on the box, the contents were kept dry.

You could also use that in both situations by adding a semicolon:
The box has a lid; that kept things dry.
(I think!)

 

[DrMoriarty]

Both of those are correct; see here.

 

[BlueSpud]

Very good. I had to read it a couple of times.

Am I right in saying the following:

a) The box has a lid that kept things dry

b) The box was indoors which kept things dry

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

Above written before Doc's link, our posts clash.
The link is good and I dont think the example breaks the rule.

I shall go forth with "that=>restrictive" and "which>incedental"

Thank you both.

 

[DrMoriarty]

a) The box has a lid which/that kept things dry.

The lid of the box is what kept things dry.

But:

b) The box was indoors, which kept things dry.

The fact that the box was indoors is what kept things dry.

 

[Bluebells]

While on the subtleties of language, has any one seen what 'car' did with a comma over on Homes & Gardens in the thread on No More Nails ?

 

[Paulone]

It's not whether its 'that' or 'which' - in the original post, the tenses are mixed:

The box has a lid that kept things dry
The box has a lid that keeps things dry

The box has a lid which kept things dry
The box has a lid which keeps things dry

See what I mean? The lid surely continues to keep things dry - unless the lid is damaged, which would read 'the box had a lid that kept things dry until it was broken etc.'

This works even if the box is empty, meaning that even if the keeping of things in the box was something that happened in the past, the inside of the box continues to be kept dry because the lid is the important aspect of the box, rather than the (dry) things inside it.

If it were about the things in the box, then the sentence would read:
Things in the box are/were kept dry because of the lid

I've just read this back and it reads so pedantically!