Timeline for Do you need the “why” in “That's the reason why”?

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

12 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Sep 12, 2021 at 15:32	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 4.0	added 3 characters in body
Feb 10, 2019 at 23:00	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 4.0	added 176 characters in body
Jul 18, 2018 at 15:34	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 4.0	added 32 characters in body
Mar 29, 2017 at 14:16	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 12 characters in body
Sep 6, 2016 at 16:54	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 45 characters in body
Jul 21, 2013 at 3:55	comment	added	siride		Note that neither "why" nor "that" are pronouns here.
Jul 20, 2013 at 23:44	comment	added	John Lawler		An NP Complement embedded question... Yes, that works, for derived picture nouns like explanation, provided explain can take an embedded question complement; and it can: He explained [why they had to fingerprint me].
Jul 20, 2013 at 22:36	comment	added	ruakh		@BraddSzonye: In "an explanation why [...]", the why-clause is an interrogative content clause, just as in "to wonder/explain/ask/examine/know/etc. how/why/whether/etc. [...]"; that's definitely distinct from the relative clause found in "the reason why [...]".
Jul 20, 2013 at 20:14	comment	added	John Lawler		I would insert for in the explanation (for) why `S`.
Jul 20, 2013 at 20:10	history	edited	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 172 characters in body
Jul 20, 2013 at 20:06	comment	added	B. Szonye		Good explanation of why it's optional in this case, although I'm not convinced that reason is the only reasonable antecedent of why. For example, the explanation why is a common usage, and I don't think you can freely substitute that in that case either. (Perhaps it's already a contraction of the explanation of why?)
Jul 20, 2013 at 19:42	history	answered	John Lawler	CC BY-SA 3.0