Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This question already has an answer here:

I would like to know whether the word that can be removed in the following sentence:

Searches revealed that Johns was awarded a grant by the Chilean Innovation Program.

I read in other threads that that can be omitted in sentences like “She said they won’t come.” But is this the case with the above structure?

Is it correct to say:

Searches revealed Johns was awarded. . . .

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by tchrist, MετάEd, aedia λ, jwpat7, Hellion Mar 14 '13 at 19:03

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

1 Answer 1

The conjunction that has a function. Sometimes it's redundant because when the that is missing, the meaning of sentence is still instantly clear. Therefore, the that is often optional.

Some people see the word "optional" and apply it dogmatically: that's the norm for most language users and rule followers.

Careful writers think about each instance and decide based on whether the sentence works better with or without the that.

In the sentence that you ask about, my feeling is that it reads better and is clearer with the that than without it, but that's just one man's opinion. I prefer to use the conjunction, but perhaps that's because I studied French, which has an equivalent structure that's almost always (I'm not sure whether it isn't dispensable in some cases) required. Other native English-speakers will have different opinions.

Both versions of the sentence are grammatical and acceptable and clear.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you for your answer! –  Marcin D. Mar 15 '13 at 15:51

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.