TUGAS 7 : Relative Clauses
Relative clauses can cause trouble in English, specially when they
begin with less common forms of the pronoun who, such as "whom"? or "whose"?.
And there’s another problem: when to use which and when to
use that? Here are some clear guidelines to help you.
9.
Extra information for French
speakers
1. Clauses with the relative pronoun
as subject
1.1. When the relative pronoun is
subject of a clause and refers to a human, the relative pronoun who is
generally used.
Examples
·
The man who lives next door is 99.
·
I know someone who eats red hot
chilli peppers.
Sometimes, who is replaced by that,
especially in American English and in spoken language:
Examples
·
The boy that lost his watch was careless.
·
However,
·
The boy who lost his watch was
careless.
·
is also quite possible.
After the antecedent those, who is
almost always required:
Those who can swim should go first.
1.2.If the relative is the subject
of a clause and refers to an inanimate antecedent, which or that must be used.
Examples
·
The book that’s on the table is
mine.
·
The book which is on the table is
mine.
1.3. IMPORTANT:
Omission:As subject of a clause, the
relative pronoun can never be omitted. However, the relative clause can be
completely omitted:
Examples
·
The book is on the table is
mine is quite impossible, but
·
The book on the table is
mine is perfectly acceptable.
2. Clauses with the relative pronoun
as object:
Even if the relative pronoun is the
object of the clause, it still stands at the start of the clause.
When the relative pronoun is the
direct object of the clause, and refers to a human, the pronoun used is either
whom or that.
Examples
·
The man whom I saw yesterday is 99.
·
The man that I saw yesterday is 99.
·
Alternatively, the relative can be
omitted, particularly in spoken language:
·
The man I saw yesterday is 99.
The relative, whether mentioned or
not, is the only object of the clause, and there can be no second object
following the verb.
Thus we cannot say or write :
The
man whom I saw him yesterday is 99. nor The man I saw him yesterday
is 99
Whom is not used very often: that,
or omission of the relative pronoun, are much more common.
When an inanimate object is referred
to, the same rules apply, except that whom is never used: it is replaced by
which.
Examples
·
The book that I was reading was very
interesting, or
·
The book which I was reading was
very interesting, or
·
The book I was reading was very
interesting are all possible
Omission: when it is the object of
the relative clause, the relative pronoun can often be omitted, particularly in
written English. as in the last example.
3. The relative pronoun as a
possessive
Whose is required with both animate
and inanimate antecedents: it is the only derivative of who which can refer to
animates and inanimates:
Examples
·
I know someone whose sister is a
nurse.
·
The man whose car I borrowed is very
rich.
·
I chose the set whose price was
reduced.
4. Relative clauses starting with a
prepositon:
4.1. Note how to form relative
clauses after prepositions: preposition + which for inanimates or
things, preposition + whom for people. Stylistically, this is quite
formal.
Examples
·
The man with whom I was talking was
angry.
·
The chair on which I sat down
collapsed.
4.2. If the relative
pronoun is omitted, then the preposition must come at the end of the
clause.
Omission of the relative pronoun in
examples like the ones below is actually by far the most common usage in modern
spoken English, and is also common in written style.
Examples
·
The man I was talking with was
angry.
·
The chair I sat down on
collapsed.
5. More complex structures:
Examples
5.1 Preposition + possession:
The player on whose skills the match
most depended, was the goalkeeper.
It is to my parents, thanks to whose
generosity I was able to complete my studies, that I am most grateful.
5.2. Selective possession
The café, most of whose customers
had deserted it, had to close.
The writer, the first of whose books
had been a bestseller, was a coal miner.
There are several ways to go from
London to Scotland , the fastest of which is of course by plane.
6. Defining and non-defining
relative clauses.
6.1. A "Defining" relative
clause (also called a restrictive or integrated relative clause) is one which
is essential for the understanding of a statement.
Example
·
Protestors who smash windows will be
arrested.
·
Cars which can do 150 miles per hour
are pointless.
·
Cars that can do 150 miles per hour
are pointless.
The first example tells us that
"protestors who smash windows" will be arrested; but suggests that
those who do not smash windows will not be arrested. . The word "protestors"
in this example is restricted by the relative clause that defines it.
Commas are not required before
and after the relative clause.
6.2. In a non-defining relative
clause (also called a non-restrictive relative clause or a supplementary
relative clause) , the relative clause is not essential for an understanding of
the sentence:
Examples
·
Protestors, who are mostly aged
under 30, want to express an opinion.
·
Cars, that were invented at the end
of the 19th century, have become a vital part of modern life.
·
In the first of these examples, the
question of age is not an essential bit of information.
·
In the second, it is obvious that it
is cars in general, not cars from the late 19th century, that are a vital part of
modern life.
·
The relative clause can be omitted
without making the sentence meaningless.
·
In cases like this, commas are
usually required before and after the relative clause.
Compare these two examples:
Examples
6.1. People who eat too much tend to
have poorer health.
6.2. Sportsmen, who pay attention to
their diet, are not usually over-weight.
6.3. Using that instead of who or
which in relative clauses
The relative pronoun that may be
used in English, particularly American English, in defining relative clauses.
That cannot replace who or
which in non-defining relative clauses.
However use of that
instead of who or which in defining clauses is an option, not a rule, and a
source of plenty of confusion.
Some grammar books suggest that
which or who must be used in defining relative clauses, and that that must be
used in non-defining relative clauses, but this is not true, not even in
American English, and countless quotes from the best authors demonstrate this.
Don't rely on grammar checkers that
come with word-processing software.
Furthermore the
grammar-check tool on Microsoft Word can be either confusing or just wrong on
this point. When the example above, Cars, that were invented at the end of the
19th century, have become a vital part of modern life. was put through the MS
Word grammar checker, the group Cars, that were invented was
underlined, and the first "correction" suggested was:
Cars that were invented at the
end of the 19th century have become a vital part of modern life ... without
commas
In this case, the grammar checker
has replaced a perfectly acceptable sentence, with the necessary commas, with a
sentence that is grammatically wrong ! Without commas, the relative clause
becomes a defining clause, and the sentence now implies that cars
from the end of the 19th century are a vital part of modern life, which is
clearly not the case.
7. Relative clauses which qualify a
whole sentence
Sometimes we use a relative clause
to qualify not just a noun or pronoun, but a whole sentence or clause. In such
cases, the relative clause is introduced by which,never that or what.
Examples
·
He drank too much, which is why he
was sick.
·
It was raining yesterday, which was
a pity.
·
There aren't enough tables in the
exam room, which is rather a problem.
8. Omission of the relative pronoun
This point is dealt with above in
the sections 2, 3 and 4 above.
Note in particular the question of
omitting the relative pronoun in a prepositional relative
clause (point 4).
English grammar
books sometimes say that it is bad style to end a sentence with a preposition;
but this is just not true. On the contrary, when the relative pronounis omitted
in a prepositional relative clause, the preposition must come at the end of the
clause, even if this is also the end of the sentence. As stated above, omission
of the relative pronoun in prepositional relative clauses is normal style in
modern English.
Examples
·
I hope that this is a page you'll
really learn something from.
·
Our company currently has enough
financial reserves to get by with.
·
The project our team is currently
working on is of huge potential significance.
Komentar
Posting Komentar