1

Our clothing is designed to take the greater "rough and tumble" that they expect boys to give it.

This is clearly an attributive clause. What baffles me is that the "it" used in the end. If " rough and tumble" were used as a noun, wouldn't "it" be redundant and against the grammar? There's no need to add an object when "that" actually does the job. And if "rough and tumble" were used as an adjective, is there a phrase called "give it rough and tumble"

  • You need to explain your question a little more. 'That' functions as a relative pronoun (it could be replaced by 'which' in British English), referring to 'rough and tumble', while 'it' refers to "clothing" and is the indirect object of "give". What is the problem about this? And how exactly could the noun phrase be construed as adjectival? – Tuffy Jun 11 at 13:34
  • I think the subordinate clause is quite confusing. The sentence would be much easier to comprehend without the "it'. I first thought the "it" was referring to the rough and tumble while "that" as a relation pronoun does the same thing. Now that you have cleared this, it makes much more sennse noe – Collivano Chan Jun 11 at 14:20
  • What do you think is the subordinate clause? – Tuffy Jun 11 at 15:15
0

The pronouns it and that are referring to different things:

Our clothing is designed to take the greater "rough and tumble" that they expect the boys to give it.

In other words:

our clothing → it
the greater "rough and tumble" → that


Of course, you could drop the use of it (and even the use of that), but the sentence would need to be rephrased slightly.

Here is one possibility:

Our clothing is designed to take the greater "rough and tumble" they expect from the boys.

  • thank you. that's really helpful – Collivano Chan Jun 14 at 12:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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