61 votes
Accepted

Shakespearean relative clause: "I have a brother is condemned to die"

TL;DR In the half a millennium since Shakespeare was writing, English has evolved new and different rules of grammar. In early modern English, relative pronouns were omissible when they represented ...
user avatar
27 votes
Accepted

How to correctly apply "in which", "of which", "at which", "to which", etc?

The trick to knowing how to use; of which, at which, in which, to which, from which is to analyse the prepositional phrases, phrasal verbs, verbs and prepositions: He /spoke of/ war and peace ...
user avatar
  • 11.8k
27 votes

Shakespearean relative clause: "I have a brother is condemned to die"

One factor I think is relevant is that this is a line of verse—"I háve a bróther ís condémned to díe" is in iambic pentameter, like the next line ("I dó beséech you, lét it bé his fáult") (Measure for ...
user avatar
  • 73.7k
25 votes
Accepted

Shouldn’t “art” be “is” in “Our Father who art in heaven”?

"Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy (your) Name," is the rest of that sentence. By saying "Our Father... Thy..." you are addressing God personally, making that the second person singular (...
user avatar
20 votes
Accepted

The film [that/which] I selected for viewing

The Original Poster's Question The film that I chose for the class to watch is called The Life of Igor. The film which I chose for the class to watch is called The Life of Igor. Both that ...
user avatar
19 votes
Accepted

Can a sentence start with relative clause (that, which etc.)?

That's not a relative (adjective) clause; it's a that-clause—a noun clause (warning: grammar terms vary). It functions as a noun does in its various roles: subject, object, complement, appositive, etc....
user avatar
  • 7,475
12 votes
Accepted

Is there a term for the grammatical/rhetorical construction of "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named"?

I think it is a case of Antonomasia: a literary term in which a descriptive phrase replaces a person’s name. Antonomasia can range from lighthearted nicknames to epic names. The phrase antonomasia ...
user avatar
  • 60.1k
10 votes
Accepted

"Who should be ashamed is your wife" is this ungrammatical? Why?

This use of who (as a subject relative pronoun without an antecedent noun phrase) is almost obsolete. It was so used in older English, and survives in a few proverbs and quotations, such as: Who ...
user avatar
  • 74.6k
10 votes
Accepted

When are relative pronouns omitted in a sentence?

There are four factors which decide whether a relative pronoun (or the word that) can be omitted or not: Is it a defining relative clause? Does the main verb in the relative clause have a separate ...
user avatar
9 votes

The use of nominative "whom" (as in “persons whom it is foreseeable are likely to...”)

The following is my original answer, which I stand by as being logical and on the face of it applicable, though it does not seem to tell the whole story. See below for a revised answer. You are right:...
user avatar
9 votes

Is this correct? "One of the things that makes him great is..."

Some of the style guides that I have are categorical in claiming that the plural verb is correct in such constructions as: One of the things that makes/make him great is he brings it every night. ...
user avatar
  • 31.3k
9 votes

Is "I am who(m) God made me" grammatical?

It's grammatical. As per my answer at SAH's question, it's grammaticality is flushed out when one adds what has been (or can be taken to have been) elided, so: I am who/m God made me to be. For ...
user avatar
9 votes
Accepted

Does the word "that" refer to "features" or "windows 9x"?

Both instances of "that" refer back to the specific features alluded to at the beginning of the sentence when it says "a number of features". Microsoft built a number of features into Windows 9x that ...
user avatar
  • 2,659
9 votes

Is this natural? "There's somebody wants to see you."

This isn’t correct in written English and I believe it’d be considered a mistake here on the West Coast of the United States, although it shouldn’t be a big deal to misspeak one word in a sentence, ...
user avatar
  • 5,002
8 votes

Why Do English Speakers Use "Preposition + Relative Pronoun" Form?

You are starting from a false premise if you believe that there is a position where the preposition "is supposed to be", particularly if you think that the correct position is "at the end of the ...
user avatar
  • 31.3k
7 votes

Shouldn’t “art” be “is” in “Our Father who art in heaven”?

The main issue here is that the original Greek uses a form that does not exist in English. The relevant portion of the Greek text reads: Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· Translated directly, word ...
user avatar
  • 20.7k
7 votes
Accepted

Do I need another 'which' in this sentence?

The second which is optional, but the first which should be a that because it's restricting "possible careers" [Grammarist]. You might want to consider rewriting your sentence as follows, sticking ...
user avatar
7 votes
Accepted

Meaning of the sentence "the body was found murdered by John"

The first version has at least three meanings: John found the body; John did the murder; someone found Mr S murdered and lying at the side of John (we don't know if John was dead too, or merely lying ...
user avatar
  • 23.3k
7 votes
Accepted

'the one you said you liked best' - Analysis of a relative clause using CGEL

In comments Araucaria wrote: There is no relative phrase as this is a 'bare' relative. The relativised element is the gap after the verb liked in the VP [liked ___ best]. Its syntactic function is ...
7 votes

Is this natural? "There's somebody wants to see you."

It doesn't look as though anyone has addressed your third question yet, so I'll give it a shot. Omitting the relative pronoun "who" would be unusual in formal speech. (As you can see from ...
user avatar
6 votes

When to use “that” and when to use “which”, especially in relative clauses

My answer comes so late that it is probably doomed to dwell at the bottom of the answer column, but the question remains a question about which I care, so my answer adds a point other answers have ...
user avatar
  • 945
6 votes
Accepted

Commas with nested subordinate clauses both of which are restrictive (essential to the meaning)

Any expectation of a comma in the examples of the OP has very little to do with the subordinate clauses' restrictiveness, but rather, as the OP suggested, with an interruption of their natural flow. ...
user avatar
  • 30.4k
6 votes
Accepted

How can the relative pronoun 'which' have an adjectival phrase as its antecedent? Exactly what may act as antecedent for 'which'?

Relative clauses with which can have a wide variety of phrases as antecedent, despite the fact that which is often described as a relative pronoun: Preposition phrase - They alleged the party was on ...
user avatar
6 votes
Accepted

Use the object pronoun or the subject pronoun as the relative pronoun heading a restrictive clause that employs a transitive verb and a linking verb?

James is the man who we know ____ is who won it. Here, "who" is not object of "know" but subject of the embedded "is" clause, marked by gap '___' . "Who won it"...
user avatar
  • 9,866
5 votes

"that which" used together

"That which" = What For example; We feel great admiration and respect for those who gave their lives for this country. Our people will long remember that which they did/ what they did.
user avatar
5 votes

"...programs that each perform..." vs "...programs that each performs...": which is correct?

The real problem with the OP is that “each” has been inserted in a position that obfuscates its purpose. It would be clearer if it said: “ foo [comprises] of multiple binary programs that perform a ...
user avatar
  • 30.4k
5 votes

Does removing the comma before 'which' etc in a non-restrictive clause change the meaning of the sentence?

If you omit the comma, the relative clause is likelier to be read as restrictive: you had a number of pizzas to choose from, and ate only the nice one. The distinction between restrictive and non-...
user avatar
5 votes

The use of nominative "whom" (as in “persons whom it is foreseeable are likely to...”)

Please find below a very short answer that agrees with Janus on most points. You owe a duty to persons *whom it is foreseeable are likely to be harmed by your conduct. If the only thing I do is ...
user avatar
5 votes

"One of the children who was" vs. "one of the children who were"

Answered here because this related question has been closed... Either is correct, but they mean different things. He is one of the boys who play football. Translation: There are some boys who ...
user avatar
  • 2,488
5 votes
Accepted

What's usage of 'to' following 'which' in a relative clause?

This is not about "to following which in a relative clause"; grammar is not strings of words. This is about a different type of Relative clause, a Relative Infinitive clause. The to is the infinitive ...
user avatar

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible