Okay, I guess I'm not seeing what we disagree on here. I prefer to use
"which" for nonrestrictive clauses and "that" for restrictive. Herb
evidently has the same preference and so is changing "which" to "that" in
restrictive clauses. You say that "which" is equally correct. I'm not
disputing that, merely saying that I personally prefer "that" and think
"which" sounds stilted. What I don't understand about your initial reply is
what you consider "backward" about changing "which" to "that."
Oh, wait, I think I see what you mean. What you were saying was "backward"
was this statement: "The only time I'll use 'which' is when there's
ambiguity about whether the clause is restrictive or not." In the context, I
thought it was clear that what I meant was something like: "The only time
I'll use 'which' [instead of 'that' in a restrictive clause] is when there's
ambiguity about whether the clause is restrictive or not."
In other words, I invariably use "which" for nonrestrictive clauses and
ordinarily use "that" for restrictive clauses but may use "which" in a
restrictive clause if there is some ambiguity about it or (additionally)
when there is another "that" in the sentence so close that the compounding
of "thats" is awkward (and of course "that which" is an exception as well).
As for ambiguity, sometimes an editor is faced with a situation in which an
author has used "which" without a preceding comma. From previous experience
with the author's prose and punctuation, the editor knows that the writer is
not good with commas, so the absence of a comma doesn't necessary mean that
the clause is restrictive, nor does the use of "which" guarantee that it's
nonrestrictive. Often it's difficult to determine the writer's intent.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
What Herb said is he "change[s] incorrect whiches to thats," and that
can only mean changing restrictive relatives introduced by "which."
You said you'd only use "which" when there's potential ambiguity as to
whether it's restrictive or not -- but introducing a restrictive with
"which" _could_ make it read as a non-restrictive (since "that" can't
be used with a non-restrictive).
Fowler would _prefer_ the distinction to be always observed, but he
says (2nd ed. top of p. 626; repeated from the 1st ed.), "Some there
are who follow this principle now; but it would be idle to pretend
that it is the practice either of most or of the best writers."
On Sep 7, 9:26 am, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Yes, the commas should be an indicator, but often there are commas anyway
because of some intervening parenthetical phrase/clause. The ambiguity
rarely surfaces in my own writing, but when I'm editing someone else's
writing and am not confident of the writer's intent...
And I don't see how that's backward, since I would not ever use "that" in
a
nonrestrictive clause.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in
...
I think that's backwards ... anyway non-restrictive relatives have
commas around them, restrictive relatives don't.
On Sep 7, 8:09 am, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
I confess I'm with Herb on this one, though. UK English tends to favor
"which" even for restrictive clauses, but it always sounds very stilted
to
me. The only time I'll use "which" is when there's ambiguity about
whether
the clause is restrictive or not.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in
...
If I found you changing my "which"es to "that"s, I wouldn't hire you a
second time!
The "rule" that restrictive relatives must have "that" is a completely
fabricated invention.
On Sep 6, 9:00 pm, "Herb Tyson [MVP]" wrote:
My clients trust my advice, but they don't always follow it--and
drafts
often go through a dozen or more contributors. So, when I receive
drafts,
I
change "spacespace" into "space", change incorrect whiches to
thats,
and fix other stuff they might be inclined to ignore or change back.
And
THEN I turn tracking on. ;-)
Herb Tyson MS MVP
Author of the Word 2007 Bible
Blog:http://word2007bible.herbtyson.com
Web:http://www.herbtyson.com
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in
. ..
Thank goodness my clients trust my advice (but then I'm an editor
and
not
a developer).
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org
"Beth Melton" wrote in message
...
"Cheryl Flanders" wrote in message
...
Yes. Several of my clients want two spaces after periods and the
paying client has the last word.
This says it all! I have a client who insists on two spaces between
sentences too. Even if I don't agree I'm paid to do what they want.
grin
~Beth Melton
Microsoft Office MVP
On Sep 3, 8:34 pm, "Peter T. Daniels"
wrote:
Is there a reason for typing two spaces after a sentence?---