 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2010'the way which' or 'the way in which'
Hi! Would you please tell me which is right, a or b? a) This is the way which she chose to live. b) This is the way in which she chose to live. I think a) derives from a2) and b) from b2). I wonder if these are both correct. a2) She chose the way to live. b2) She chose to live in this way. Thanks a lot in advance. LP >a) This is the way which she chose to live. To my ear, "which" sounds wrong or at least awkward in this construction. Either using "that" or omitting the relative pronoun is normal: This is the way that she chose to live. This is the way she chose to live. >a2) She chose the way to live. No, it's "She chose to live this way." The noun phrase is used adverbially. "Which" seems wrong in replacing it because of its other function as an interrogative pronoun. You wouldn't ask which or what, you'd ask *how* she chose to live. You could *also* say "She chose this way to live," and the corresponding relative construction would be "This is the way to live [which/that] she chose." ¬R Where'd they come from, these guys? And why does it smell o|-< ><> like herring and straw in here all of a sudden? http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/engel.html --Kevin S. Wilson >>a) This is the way which she chose to live. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >relative construction would be "This is the way to live [which/that] she >chose." At a very early age, I'm convinced that I was taught that "which" was usually preferable to "that", and that "that" was rather slovenly. As a result, "which" is what I generally use. However, I've seen reference in this NG about there being definite rules for "which" and "that", and, if this is so, I have a nasty feeling that, for over sixty years, I may often have been getting things wrong.  SignatureIan >>> a) This is the way which she chose to live. >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > this is so, I have a nasty feeling that, for over sixty years, I may > often have been getting things wrong. Some claim that "that" always indicates a restrictive clause and "which" always indicates an unrestrictive clause. But "which" is often used in restrictive clauses. I don't recall ever having seen "that" used in an unrestrictive clause. Bill in Kentucky >>>> a) This is the way which she chose to live. >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >used in restrictive clauses. I don't recall ever having seen "that" >used in an unrestrictive clause. Any chance of a few examples? SignatureIan <snip> > >Some claim that "that" always indicates a restrictive clause and > >"which" always indicates an unrestrictive clause. But "which" is often > >used in restrictive clauses. I don't recall ever having seen "that" > >used in an unrestrictive clause. > Any chance of a few examples? Restrictive: "I opened the book that I had found under the desk." Unrestrictive: "I opened my book, which I had found under the desk." SignatureOdysseus >At a very early age, I'm convinced that I was taught that "which" was >usually preferable to "that", and that "that" was rather slovenly. As a >result, "which" is what I generally use. However, I've seen reference in >this NG about there being definite rules for "which" and "that" The one totally definite rule is that "that" is used only in restrictive clauses. "Which" is always defensible (even in the use at hand that I say "sounds wrong"), so you're safe enough in always using it. Some editors insist additionally that "that" should *always* be used, never "which," in restrictive relative clauses. This simplifies their proofreaders' job of finding misplaced commas a little, but it doesn't always make better prose, and it's an impossible rule to follow after a preposition of which the relative pronoun is the object (as in this sentence). ¬R "Carl Sagan is more educational than J.R.R. Tolkien even though they were both total stoners." K. http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/cosmic.html > >a) This is the way which she chose to live. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > ¬R Where'd they come from, these guys? And why does it smell > o|-< ><> like herring and straw in here all of a sudden?http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/engel.html --Kevin S. Wilson Thanks for your comment. I just wonder if b) is possible, where I suppose 'that' can also replace 'in which', as 'This is the way that she chose to live.' b) This is the way (in which/ that) she chose to live. LP >Thanks for your comment. I just wonder if b) is possible, where I >suppose 'that' can also replace 'in which', as 'This is the way that >she chose to live.' Yes, (b) is correct. With "that," or with the relative pronoun omitted, the preposition doesn't vanish; it just has to go to the end of the clause: "This is the way [that] she chose to live in." ¬R Blather, Rinse, Repeat. http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/telecom.html > >Thanks for your comment. I just wonder if b) is possible, where I > >suppose 'that' can also replace 'in which', as 'This is the way that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the preposition doesn't vanish; it just has to go to the end of the > clause: "This is the way [that] she chose to live in." I suppose it's just barely possible to say "This is the way she chose to live in" without wanting to take it back and phrase it better, but it's alien enough to me that I'd call it unidiomatic if not ungrammatical. I take that view even though I would allow "She chose to live [in] this way" with or without the 'in," but again I prefer the "in"-less version. Rather than venture into a terminological thicket. I think I'll chalk my view up to native-speaker instinct. SignatureBob Lieblich Posting in this way > > >Thanks for your comment. I just wonder if b) is possible, where I > > >suppose 'that' can also replace 'in which', as 'This is the way that [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Bob Lieblich > Posting in this way Good instincts, Bob. The real reason there's a conflict is that the suite of Wh-words that do double duty in English as interrogative and relative markers have a lot of individual eccentricities. In this particular case, "how" is quite common in questions, but it can't be used as a relative pronoun (or relative adverb, if you'd prefer): Where did he go? That's the place where he went. How did he manage it? *That's the way how he managed it. Since native speakers will automatically avoid this kind of construction, the thought of what it might be if "how" *were* available as a relative clause marker probably wouldn't occur to them. In studying syntax, one tries to produce sentences that follow what are thought to be the rules, and then tests them for grammaticality, to see whether the rules are in fact correct; it turns out pretty frequently that they're really, really complex. Licensing the study of ungrammatical sentences is, to my mind, Chomsky's single most important contribution to linguistics. -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler "When you hear a linguist use the word 'theory', you should put your hand on your wallet." -- James D. McCawley |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.