RELATIVE CLAUSES

RELATIVE CLAUSES [Based on Swan, Michael. Practical English Usage. Oxford (3) 2005, pp. 477–487]

I. Basic information

Clauses beginning with question words (e.g. who, which, where) are often used to modify nouns and some pronouns – to identify people and things, or to give more information about them. Such clauses are called relative clauses.

Do you know the people who live next door?

Those who want tickets can get them from the office.

There’s a programme tonight which you might like.

He lives in a village where there are no shops.

Relative clauses are introduced by relative pronouns. Words that are used as relative pronouns include who, whom, which, that, whose, whatever, whichever, whomever, where, when, why.

Who, which, and that can be the subjects of relative clauses.

I like people who smile a lot.

This is the key which opens the garage.

Who(m), which, and that can also be the objects in relative clauses. (Whom is unusual in an informal[1] style.)

Do you remember the people who we met in Italy?

I forget most of the films which I see.

We often use that instead of who or which, esp. in an informal style.

I like people that smile a lot.

This is the key that opens the garage.

Do you remember the people that we met in Italy?

I forget most of the films that I see.

That is esp. common after quantifiers like all, every(thing), some(thing), any(thing), no(thing), none, little, few, much, only, and after superlatives.

Is this all that’s left?

Have you got anything that belongs to me?

The only thing that matters is that we find our way home.

I hope the little that I’ve done has been useful.

It’s the best film that’s ever been made about madness.

NOTE: what cannot be used in these cases!

All that you say is certainly true. (All what you say…)

WHAT

What does not refer to a noun that precedes it. It rather acts as a noun + relative pronoun together, and means “the thing(s) which.” Clauses beginning with what can act as subjects, objects, or complements after be.

What she said made me angry. (subject of made)

I hope you’re going to give me what I need. (object of give)

This is exactly what I wanted. (complement)

What is only used to mean “the thing(s) which” and cannot be used as an ordinary relative pronoun after a noun or pronoun.

We haven’t got everything that you ordered. (NOT … everything what …)

The only thing that keeps me awake is coffee. (NOT The only thing what…)

We use which, not what, to refer to a whole clause that comes before.

Sally married Joe, which made Paul very unhappy. (NOT … what made …)

What can also be used as a determiner with a noun.

What money he has comes from his family. (= The money that he has…)

I’ll give you what help I can. (= … any help that I can)

Object pronouns can often be left out. (This is not possible in non-identifying/ non-defining relative clauses.)

Do you remember the people we met in Italy?

I forget most of the films I see.

All I want is your happiness.

Whose is a possessive relative pronoun, used as a determiner before nouns in the same way as his/her/its/their. It can refer back to people or things and be used in both identifying and non-identifying clauses. In a relative clause, whose + noun can be the subject, the object of a verb or the object of a preposition.

I saw a girl whose hair came down to her waist. (subject)

It was a meeting whose purpose eluded me. (object)

Michael Croz, with whose help Whymper climbed the Matterhorn, was one of the first professional guides. (object of preposition)

I went to see my friends the Forrests, whose children I used to look after when they were small. (object of preposition)

Instead of whose, we can use of which or that … of (less formal) to refer to things, and these are sometimes preferred. The most common word order is noun + of which or that … of, but of which … + noun is also possible. Cf. the following four ways of expressing the same idea.

He’s written a book whose name I’ve forgotten.

He’s written a book the name of which I’ve forgotten.

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

He’s written a book of which I’ve forgotten the name.

We do not normally use noun + of whom in a possessive sense to talk about people.

a man whose name I’ve forgotten (NOT a man of whom I’ve forgotten the name)

Sentences with whose are generally felt to be rather heavy and formal; in an informal style, other structures are often preferred. With is a common way of expressing possessive ideas, and is usually more natural than whose in descriptions.

I’ve got some friends with a house that looks over a river.

(Less formal than … whose house looks over a river.)

You know that girl with a brother who drives lorries?

(Less formal than … whose brother drives lorries?)

She’s married to the man over there with the enormous ears.

(Less formal than … whose ears are enormous.)

Which can refer not only to a noun, but also to the whole of a previous clause. NOTE: what cannot be used in this way.

He got married again a year later, which surprised everybody.

She cycled from London to Glasgow, which is pretty good for a woman of 75.

When and where can introduce relative clauses after nouns referring to time and place. They are used in the same way as preposition + which.

I’ll never forget the day when I first met you. (= the day on which)

Do you know a shop where I can find sandals? (= a shop at which)

Why is used in a similar way after reason.

Do you know the reason why she doesn’t like me? (= the reason for which)

II. Identifying/ Defining and non-identifying/ non-defining relative clauses

There are two kinds of relative clauses:

identifying/ defining/ restrictive – non-identifying/ non-defining/ non-restrictive

Some relative clauses identify, define, or classify nouns: they tell us which person or thing, or which kind of person or thing, is meant.

What’s the name of the tall man who just came in?

People who take physical exercise live longer.

Who owns the car which is parked outside?

Have you got something that will get ink out of a carpet?

Other relative clauses do not identify, define, or classify; they simply tell us more about a person or thing that is already identified.

This is Mrs. Rogers, who’s joining the firm next week.

In 1908 Ford developed his Model T car, which sold for $ 500.

There are several grammatical differences between the two kinds of relative clause. There are also stylistic differences: non-identifying clauses are generally more formal, and are less frequent in informal speech.

The woman who does my hair has moved to another hairdresser’s.

Dorothy, who does my hair, has moved to another hairdresser’s.

She married a man that she met on a bus.

She married a very nice young architect from Belfast, whom she met on a bus.

Note how the identifying clauses cannot easily be left out.

The woman has moved to another hairdresser’s. (Which woman?)

She married a man.

Remember that a non-identifying clause that does not come at the end of a sentence is enclosed by two commas; forgetting the second comma is a mistake.

Dorothy, who does my hair, has moved to Belfast. (NOT Dorothy, who does my hair has moved to Belfast.)

That is common as a relative pronoun in identifying clauses. In non-identifying clauses, that is highly unusual (and not recommended in exams! J).[2] Compare:

Have you got a book which/ that is really easy to read?

I lent him The Old Man and the Sea, which is really easy to read. (NOT …The Old Man and the Sea, that is really easy to read.)

Where’s the girl who/ that sells the tickets?

This is Naomi, who sells the tickets. (NOT This is Naomi, that sells the tickets.)

In identifying relative clauses, we often leave out the object pronouns, esp. in an informal style. In non-identifying clauses this is not possible. Cf.:

I feel sorry for the man she married.

She met my brother, whom she later married. (NOT She met my brother, she later married.)

Did you like the wine we drank last night?

I poured him a glass of wine, which he drank at once. (NOT I poured him a glass of wine, he drank at once.)

III. Advanced points

Double function of relative pronouns: note that relative pronouns have a double use: they act as subjects or objects inside relative clauses, and at the same time they connect relative clauses to nouns or pronouns in other clauses – rather like conjunctions.

In non-identifying clauses, the pronouns who and which sometimes act as general-purpose connecting words, rather like and + pronoun.

I dropped the saucepan, which knocked over the eggs, which went all over the floor.

(= …and it knocked… and they went…)

I do a lot of walking, which keeps me fit. (= … and this keeps me fit.)

Who can be used as an object in identifying clauses in an informal style. Whom is more formal.

The woman who I marry will have a good sense of humor. (More formal: The woman whom I marry…)

In non-identifying clauses, who is less common as an object, though it is sometimes used in an informal style.

In that year he met Rachel, whom he was later to marry. (OR … Rachel, who he was later to marry. – informal)

That in identifying relative clauses instead of who/ whom/ which is most common as an object, or as a subject instead of which. That can be used as a subject instead of who, but this is quite informal. Cf.

the people that I invited (normal) the books that I lent you (normal)

the bus that crashed (normal)

the people that live next door (informal; the people who… is preferred in a less formal style)

Which can be used as a determiner in relative clauses, with a general noun which repeats the meaning of what came before. This structure is rather formal, and is mainly used after prepositions, esp. in some fixed phrases like in which case and at which point.

She may be late, in which case we ought to wait for her.

He lost his temper, at which point I decided to go home.

He was appointed Lord Chancellor, in which post he spent the rest of his life.

She spoke in Greek, which language I could only follow with difficulty.

After common nouns referring to time, when is often replaced by that or dropped in an informal style.

Come and see us any time (that) you’re in town.

I’ll never forget the day (that) we met.

That was the year (that) I first went abroad.

The same thing happens with where after somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, nowhere, and place (but not after other words).

Have you got somewhere (that) I can lie down for an hour?

We need a place (that) we can stay for a few days. (BUT NOT We need a house we can stay for a few days.)

After way, in which can be replaced by that or dropped in an informal style.

I didn’t like the way (that) she spoke to me.

Do you know a way (that) you can make money without working?

The same thing happens with why after reason.

The reason (that) you’re so bad-tempered is that you’re hungry.

Prepositions can come either before relative pronouns (more formal) or at the ends of relative clauses (more informal). Cf.:

He was respected by the people with whom he worked. (formal)

He was respected by the people (that) he worked with. (informal)

This is the room in which I was born. (formal)

This is the room (that) I was born in. (informal)

Who and that are not used after prepositions.

… the people with whom he worked. (NOT … the people with who/ that he worked.)

In non-identifying clauses, quantifying determiners (e.g. some, any, none, all, both, several, enough, many, and few) can be used with of whom, of which and of whose. The determiner most often comes before of which/ whom/ whose, but can sometimes come after it in a very formal style.

They picked up five boat-loads of refugees, some of whom had been at sea for several months. (OR … of whom some …)

We’ve tested three hundred types of boot, none of which is completely waterproof. (OR … of which none …)

They’ve got eight children, all of whome are studying music. (OR … of whome all are studying …)

She had a teddy-bear, both of whose eyes were missing.

This structure is also possible with other expressions of quantity, with superlatives, with first, second, etc., and with last.

a number of whom three of which half of which

the majority of whom the youngest of whom

Reduced relative clauses: a participle is often used instead of a relative pronoun and full verb.

Who’s the girl dancing with your brother? (… that is dancing …)

Anyone touching that wire will get a shock. (… who touches …)

Half of the people invited to the party didn’t show up. (… who were invited …)

I found him sitting at a table covered with papers. (… that was covered …)

While relative pronouns usually follow their nouns directly, a descriptive phrase can sometimes separate a noun from its relative pronoun. Cf.:

The idea which she put forward was interesting. (NOT The idea was interesting which she put forward.)

I rang up Ms. Smith, who did our accounts. (NOT I rang Ms. Smith up, who did our accounts.)

I rang up Ms. Smith, the Manager’s secretary, who did our accounts.

Most relative clauses have third-person reference; I who…, you who…, and we who… are unusual, though they sometimes occur in a very formal style.

You who pass by, tell them of us and say

For their tomorrow we gave our today.

(Allied war memorial at Kohima.)

A different kind of first- and second-person reference is common in the relative clauses of cleft sentences. However, the verb is usually third-person, esp. in an informal style.

It’s me that’s responsible for the organization. (More formal: It is I who am responsible…)

You’re the one that knows where to go. (NOT … the one that know …)

The distinction between identifying and non-identifying clauses is most clear when they modify definite noun phrases like the car, this house, my father, Mrs. Lewis. After indefinite noun phrases like a car, some nurses, or friends, the distinction is less clear, and both kinds of clause are often possible with slight differences of emphasis.

He’s got a new car that goes like a bomb. (OR He’s got a new car, which goes like a bomb.)

We became friendly with some nurses that John had met in Paris. (OR We became friendly with some nurses, whom John had met in Paris.)

In general, identifying clauses are used when the information they give is felt to be centrally important to the overall message. When this is not so, non-identifying clauses are preferred.

Occasionally a relative pronoun acts as the object of two verbs. This happens esp. when a relative clause is followed by before …ing, after …ing, or without …ing.

We have water that it’s best not to drink before boiling. (OR … boiling it.)

I’m sending you a letter that I want you to destroy after reading. (OR … after reading it.)

He was somebody that you could like without admiring. (OR … admiring him.)

In older English, who could be used in a similar way to what, as noun + relative pronoun together, meaning “the person who,” “whoever,” or “anybody who.” In modern English, this is very unusual.

Who steals my purse steals trash. (Shakespeare, Othello; modern usage: Whoever/ Anybody who …)

That which used to be used in the same way as what. This, too, is highly unusual in modern English.

We have that which we need. (Modern English: We have what we need.)

[There are some other relative structures you may want to consult Swan about if they strike you as unclear:

Whatever, whoever, etc.:

Take whatever you want. (= … anything that you want …)

This is for whoever wants it. (= … any person that wants it)

I often think about where I met him. (= … the place where …)

We’ve bought a house in the country for when we retire. (… the time when…)

Whenever you want to come is fine with me. (… any day that …)

Look at how she treats him. (… the way in which …)

Relative + infinitive: a garden in which to play:

I can’t think of anybody to invite. (NOT … anybody whom to invite.)

We moved to the country so that the children would have a garden in which play.

We moved to the country so that the children would have a garden to play in. (NOT … which to play in.)

He was miserable unless he had neighbors with whom to quarrel.

He was miserable unless he had neighbors to quarrel with. (NOT … whom to quarrel with.)

Combining relative clauses with indirect statements and similar structures, e.g. I know/ said/ feel/ hope/ wish (that) … :

We’re going to meet somebody (who/that) I know (that) you’ll like.

It’s a house (which/ that) we feel (that) we might want to buy.

That’s the man (who/ that) I wish (that) I had married.

This is the woman (who/ that) Anne said could show us the house. (NOT This is the woman (who/that) Ann said that could show us the house.)

Highly unusual: This is a letter from my father, whom we hope will be out of the hospital soon.

Better and normal: This is a letter from my father, who we hope will be out of the hospital soon.

I am enclosing an application form, which I should be grateful if you would sign and return.

In highly informal speech, relative clauses are sometimes combined with indirect question structures.

I’ve just been to see an old friend that I’m not sure when I’m going to see again.

There’s a pile of washing-up that I don’t know how I’m going to do this weekend.

Although there is no grammatically correct way of doing this when the relative pronoun is the subject of the relative clause, this is sometimes done in informal speech. As for your purposes: Don’t try this at home – or in your exams J…

I was driving a car that I didn’t know how fast it could go.

It’s ridiculous to sing songs that you don’t know what they mean.

There’s a control at the back that I don’t understand how it works.

There’s still one kid that I must find out whether she’s coming to the party or not.

In a highly informal style, a subject relative pronoun is sometimes dropped after there is.

There’s a man at the door wants to talk to you.

Again, nothing to try at home…]

---

[1] The note “informal” may, but does not have to, mean that you should avoid usage thus characterized, at least within non-colloquial texts. However, once you are told something is “highly/ very informal,” “unusual,” etc., you should know but not apply such usages: here, you are often looking at euphemisms for “conventionally incorrect.”

[2] Please be extremely cautious when using that around commas; actually, you might want to avoid using commas before that altogether. Many grammarians tell you that that is never used following a comma. As such, this statement is incorrect; however, these grammarians are trying to make things easier for you by simplifying a very pronounced tendency. That as a relative pronoun and even more as a conjunction is only very rarely used after a comma; in most cases, it is a bad mistake to use a comma before that = conjunction and that = relative pronoun and will be sanctioned accordingly (= severely…). (Mostly, that will follow a comma when it is used as a demonstrative pronoun or in insertions [“…, that is, …” is a common example]; cases where that = relative pronoun is preceded by a comma are so rare that you may safely regard this as a “never ever” rule as far as your use of that = relative pronoun is concerned).