Which/ whose and others, please help me

English as a Second Language English Vocabulary, Grammar and Idioms
1

  1. I 've found a bunch of flowers but I don’t know whose they are.

  2. This shirt is still very dirty, even though/ even if I 've washed it twice.

  3. If I have more time, I will learn how to play the guitar.
    = or, If I had more time, I would learn/ study how to play the guitar.

  4. Pompeii which is an ancient city in Italy was completely destroyed in A.D. 79 by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius.

  5. Even though we came to the show late due to the traffic Jam, We can/ could see the main part of the show.

  6. we went to the restaurant which/ where Jane had recommended to us.

  7. If Peter goes sailing, he will need/ needs a life- jacket.

2 Likes
2

Hi, here are my suggestions:

5 Likes
3

Many thanks for your help sir, but I still don’t get the point No. 4. What is the differeces between “which” and " where" AND " how we have to use a commas in front of ?"

2 Likes
4

Well, the easier question to answer is the commas - we always put a comma before “which” because “which” gives information that is not essential to the meaning of the sentence. If the information is essential, we use “that” instead and do not use a comma:

“We went to the restaurant, which Jane had recommended to us.” {Somehow we already knew what “the restaurant” was, so the which clause is not essential.}

“We went to the restaurant that Jane had recommended to us.” {The that clause defines the specific restaurant, so it is essential to the meaning of the sentence. I think this is probably what you meant to say in your original question}

I am having a hard time explaining the difference in usage between “which” and “where”. Maybe someone else can give a simple explanation.

3 Likes
5

I think we may explain which as meaning that, and where as meaning at which as in:
We went to the restaurant which (that) served delicious food.
We went to the restaurant where (at which) we could eat delicious food.

Now, coming to ‘We went to the restaurant, which Jane had recommended to us.’ I beg to differ with you, Luschen. It should be We went to the restaurant which Jane had recommended to us. because this is a reference to a specific restaurant, and so, the comma is not necessary. In other words, it is a defining/restrictive clause which, I think, is essential to describe that particular restaurant.

Yes, as you say, if the speaker just says We went to the restaurant., then it is presumed that the restaurant mentioned by the speaker is known to the listener as well.

3 Likes
6

Well, I am going to stick to my guns on this one. I agree that “which” is substituted for “that” a lot these days, but the “official grammar rule” is that which introduces clauses that are nonessential and so is preceded by a comma. When to Use a Comma Before Which | Grammarly This guy may explain it better: https://www.writersdigest.com/online-editor/which-vs-that

3 Likes
7

I appreciate you, Luschen, for your assertion.

Now it seems that restrictive and non restrictive clauses are identified by two methods. One with the use of which without commas (for restrictive clauses) and with which and commas (for non restrictive clauses), AND the other with the use of that (for restrictive clauses) and with which and commas (for non restrictive clauses).

If my observation is correct, I agree to the use of that (without commas) also for restrictive clauses.
(And it is also true that the clause beginning with that cannot be separated by commas)

2 Likes
8

I believe that claiming ‘which’ is only a non-defining relative is not acceptable. Obviously ‘that’ is only used in relative clauses as a defining relative. For me these sentences illustrate how ‘which’ can be both defining and non-defining -

The house which she bought yesterday has five bedrooms - she bought a house with two bedrooms today.

The house, which she bought yesterday, has five bedrooms. - she is always buying houses.

3 Likes
9

I guess we will just have to disagree, I think “that” should be used as a defining relative, and “which” should be reserved for use only as a non-defining relative. I suppose I am outvoted, at least on this forum, but I will persevere! :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

3 Likes
10

Let’s try this -

A Where is the house which has beams in the living room?
B Which one do you mean?
A The one which has red shutters.

Is that acceptable?

1 Like
11

Well, to be perfectly honest, it is not acceptable to me :slight_smile: Apparently, this is another US/UK difference, compounded by my somewhat advanced age. The “rule” that was hammered into me in middle school has relaxed somewhat in the US recently and never really existed in the UK, but old habits die hard. I am in good company though, as the New York Times Style Manual and the AP Style Book are pretty strict on not using “which” for restrictive clauses, and the Chicago Manual of Style “strongly recommends” this approach.

https://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/that-which-or-what/

1 Like
12

Hi Luschen,

Without wishing to flog a dead horse, I’d like to know how your rules square with using ‘which’ immediately after a preposition. Obviously in this sentence you have to use ‘which’ -

The house in which he lives has dry rot.

Isn’t that to all intents and propose a defining relative?

And then we come to -

The house which he lives in.

How does that square?

2 Likes
13

Alan, while I fully agree with you and appreciate your exemplification, I find our Luschen to be unusually rigid on the issue. Maybe, sort of UK/US difference as he says!
Agreeing to disagree, I hope the two idioms ‘Old habits die hard’ and ‘To flog a dead horse’ would put an end to this interesting topic.

1 Like
14

hm… I hope it´s not an annoyance to Anglophile, though I have another suggestion for the quoted sentence. Why not omit the “which” here and type it:
Pompeii [-]an ancient city in Italy[-] was completely destroyed in A.D. 79 by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius.
lol.as I am famous in town for my laziness it would save me from wonderring about tenses and use of which and commas. :blush::blush:

3 Likes
15

Pompeii, an ancient city in Italy, was completely destroyed in A.D. 79 by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius. (Though the commas, rather than dashes, are usually put for clauses in apposition, your alternative is acceptable). But even this method points to the fact that it is a non-restrictive phrase, so to say.

However, the sentence “Pompeii which is an ancient city in Italy was completely destroyed in A.D. 79 by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius.”, cannot be good unless there are two cities (one ancient, and the other, perhaps, modern) by the very name Pompeii. (Absence or presence of commas does matter here as it can alter the semantics.)

But I think we are sailing in the same boat!

2 Likes