English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This question already has an answer here:

Every time when I write a sentence in Microsoft Word like this:

the rats which are the food of snake are crazily growing.

It always recommends me to rewrite like this:

the rats, which are the food of snake, are crazily growing.

Is it true that which should always start with a comma?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by FumbleFingers, Robusto, Matt E. Эллен, Rory Alsop, Mitch Apr 4 '13 at 17:05

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.

How could you trust the grammatical reliability of Microsoft programmers, who use the words "datas" & "schemas" when actually, the plural for schema is schemata, and data is already the plural of datum? – Blessed Geek Apr 4 '13 at 1:23
@BlessedGeek: It is current accepted practice in AmE that, despite the source languages, 'data' is a mass noun (has no plural) so yes you're right that 'datas' is crazy but for the wrong reason, and 'schemas' is an acceptable alternative to schemata. – Mitch Apr 4 '13 at 17:05
@BlessedGeek what makes you think it's programmers that define these recommendations? Developing software is not just work of programmers but actually cooperative effort of many specialists. (I have no idea where you got the "schemas" and "datas" examples...) – Alois Mahdal Aug 19 '15 at 17:50
up vote 6 down vote accepted

No, it is not true. This is a bug in Microsoft Word, just one out of millions. You really should not take it too seriously.

What is correct is that if there is no comma before the which, that it is a defining relative clause, but if there is a comma, it is a non-defining one.

  1. The rats which are the snake's food are growing crazily. (defining)
  2. The rats, which are the snake's food, are growing crazily. (non-defining)
  3. The rats that are the snake's food are growing crazily. (defining)
  4. The rats (which are the snake's food) are growing crazily. (non-defining)
  5. The rats are growing crazily.

Numbers 1 and 3 mean exactly the same thing.

Numbers 2 and 4 mean the same thing as each other, and are essentially the same as number 5.

This is discussed in this answer to ELU question #96.

share|improve this answer
Turn off the MS Word grammar checker. It is totally bugged and of no use. Unless you enjoy not understanding what's going on. – John Lawler Apr 3 '13 at 18:03

Short answer - no. You would not use a comma in the following examples, though MS might advise you to do so:

Do you know which one you want?

I'll let John choose which one to have.

He always knew which cafe had the best food.

As a basic rule, if you can remove the which clause and still have a complete sentence (tchrist's example 4) then it would be best to enclose it in commas.

However, you have to be sure of the meaning you are trying to convey - context is everything. For example:

The chairs, which I had painted blue, were very comfortable. [The chairs were very comfortable. I had painted them blue.]

The chairs which I had painted blue were very comfortable. [As opposed to some other chairs, which were not very comfortable.]

share|improve this answer

The simple answer:

If you're talking about a specific kind of thing you must use comma. look at these examples:

1.Pizza, which most people love, is not very healthy.

2.The people whose names are on the list will go to camp.

But be aware, If this is a story and the rats are known you need to use comma.

share|improve this answer

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