that I've forgotten the name of

< Previous | Next >

younghon

Senior Member
Korean - Korea
1. He's written a book whose name I've forgotten.

2.He's written a book that I've forgotten the name of.

3. He bought a car, that I can't remember the name of.


Q: In the above sentences, No.2 can be replaced by 'which' instead of 'that'? And

in No.3, 'comma' can be used before 'that'?

Thanks in advance!
 
  • Enquiring Mind

    Senior Member
    English - the Queen's
    Hi younghon,
    He's written a book that/which I've forgotten the name of. :tick:
    Relative Pronouns (...) We use who and whom for people, and which for things. Or we can use that for people or things. (British Council)
    I believe AmE speakers tend to prefer "that" rather than "which" in this (restrictive relative clause) syntax:
    Style guides by American prescriptivists, such as Bryan Garner, typically insist, for stylistic reasons, that that be used for restrictive relative clauses and which be used for non-restrictive clauses, referring to the use of which in restrictive clauses as a "mistake".[18] According to the 2015 edition of Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage, "In AmE which is "not generally used in restrictive clauses, and that fact is then interpreted as the absolute rule that only that may introduce a restrictive clause", whereas in BrE "either that or which may be used in restrictive clauses", but many British people "believe that that is obligatory" (Wiki)
    No, the comma in 3 is incorrect.
     
    Last edited:

    lingobingo

    Senior Member
    English - England
    The comma in 3 is wrong. As I’m sure you know, that with no punctuation indicates a restrictive relative clause, while which preceded by a comma indicates a non-restrictive clause. If you use a comma with that, it’s not clear what you mean.

    In 2, you could use which instead of that, but it would not be an improvement. Alternatively, you could use no relative pronoun at all.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top