The Christmas season is upon us, and for many people, that means gathering with relatives. Maybe you tend to avoid some of these relatives during the rest of the year because you find it difficult to get along with them, or maybe you’re just not acquainted enough to feel comfortable in their company. If our relationships with family can be like this, it’s no surprise that our relationship with certain parts of grammar can also be an exercise in avoiding the unfamiliar or uncomfortable.
So, today, let’s face another commonly confusing part of English grammar: relative pronouns. This special group of pronouns (words that can replace nouns) introduce clauses that give more information about a noun that came before it. For example, “I went to the store that keeps a large supply of chocolate milk on hand.” In this sentence, the relative pronoun is that and the clause that follows (keeps a large supply of chocolate milk on hand) tells the reader more about the store (the noun).
There are two pairs of relative pronouns that can get especially tangled up in our minds because the rules are not always intuitive, even to native English speakers. The rules for the first pair, which and that, are simple to remember once you have a firm grasp of restrictive and non-restrictive clauses. However, the rules for the second pair, who and whom, can be more elusive.
To start with which and that, let’s talk about restrictive and non-restrictive clauses. Quite simply, a restrictive clause is essential to form a complete sentence, but a non-restrictive clause is not. To remember the meaning of these terms, you may find it more helpful to use the older terms defining and non-defining clauses. I like to think of a non-restrictive clause as a parenthetical phrase (i.e., you can place it in parentheses, which indicate nonessential information): if you can take the clause out of the sentence and its meaning remains intact, then it’s non-restrictive. This is why non-restrictive clauses are set off by commas, parenthesis, or dashes.
In American and Canadian English, that is used before a restrictive clause and which is used before a non-restrictive clause. Most famously, Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style, a handbook for aspiring writers, promotes this rule (as well as the Chicago Manual of Style, which is commonly used in academic and fiction publishing). The only exception is that which can be used restrictively when it’s preceded by a preposition.
Restrictive
The spider (that has spun its web in the corner of our barn) reminds me of the one in Charlotte’s Web.
There aren’t many situations (in which I would defend him).
Non-restrictive
The diner, (which is the oldest in the city), makes my favourite pancakes.
If you’re writing for a British audience, however, it’s good to be aware that writers and editors of British English do not usually observe distinctions between which and that when they appear as relative pronouns. The Merriam Webster dictionary partially agrees with this usage: it instructs that either which or that can be used to introduce a restrictive clause, but only which can introduce a non-restrictive clause. Nonetheless, I advocate for following the straightforward approach of distinguishing between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.
Now let’s move on to whom and who. Of course, a person should be referred to as a who or whom, not a that. But how do you know which pronoun to use in which context? In simple terms, who refers to the subject of a sentence and whom refers to the object (remember that subjects and objects are nouns, which relative pronouns point back to). A common trick is to substitute he/she/they for who and and him/her/them for whom. It’s also helpful to remember that whom is always used instead of who after the prepositions to, for, with, and of. As with which and that, adding commas depends on whether or not the clause that follows is restrictive or non-restrictive.
Restrictive
The man (who lives across the street) is never at home. → Who lives across the street? He lives across the street.
Who drove into the tree? → Who drove into the tree? He drove into the tree.
She saw the haggard face of a woman (whom she knew long ago). → Whom did she know long ago? She knew her.
Whom do you believe? → Whom do you believe? I believe her.
Non-restrictive
My fiance, who lives in Manhattan, feeds too many stray cats from the balcony of her apartment. → Who lives in Manhattan? She lives in Manhattan.
The children, many of whom are a long way from home, have been having trouble sleeping. → Used after the preposition of.
My roommate, (whom I’ve known since childhood), knows how to push my buttons. → Whom has he known since childhood? He has known him.
Since native English speakers tend to use who in every instance when speaking, many people dismiss whom as pretentious and old-fashioned, but it’s especially important to use the correct form in academic and professional writing. It may not be familiar or comfortable, but just like unfamiliar or difficult relatives at family gatherings, if you put in a positive effort, you may be pleasantly surprised by the results.
Comments