The relative pronoun - that

After reading an interesting article entitled Relatively speaking By GUY PERRING published by THE STAR’S MIND OUR ENGLISH of June 23, 2006, I wrote on June 25, 2006 my comments to its editor who did not publish but forwarded them directly to the writer himself.
I reproduce below the article, my comments and the writer’s reply for your reading pleasure.
The Article
Quote
MIND OUR ENGLISH Friday June 23, 2006
Relatively speaking
By GUY PERRING
RELATIVE clauses can cause real problems for business people when they write business documents. Indeed, they are often avoided due to the confusion over their usage.
This is a pity since the writer will then be left with simple sentences, and the reader will assume the writer is unsophisticated in their knowledge of the language.
The worry stems from the fact that in other languages, the relative clause would simply come before the noun and become part of an adjectival phrase. So, for example, in the sentence Managers who fail to give effective feedback are often poor would in other languages have the following word order “Fail to give effective feedback managers are often poor”.
Note that in English, this is unfortunately not possible, but would arguably make life easier for students of the language.
Essentially, sentences can be divided into parts called clauses. A relative clause is a part of a sentence that describes the person or thing we are talking about and is connected to other clauses in the sentence via a relative pronoun – who, which or that. Relative pronouns replace the subject or object of the verb:Where is the new staff member? He was at work yesterday.Where is the new staff member that was at work yesterday?Can I borrow the CD? You bought the CD.Can I borrow the CD that you bought?
There are two main types:Identifying relative clausesThe client that I visited this morning, gave me his phone number.“that I visited” (the relative clause)identifies which client (there could be many clients).
Non-identifying relative clausesThis is my colleague, Thomas, who came on holiday with me last year.
“who came on holiday with me last year” does not identify which colleague (we know “which” colleague – the colleague is Thomas).
Note that in written English, non-identifying relative clauses are separated by commas, and in speech, by pauses. These commas have a similar function to brackets in that they add extra information. In a sense, we could use the phrase by the way after the remarks.
Keeping who, which and thatYou cannot leave out who, which, that when:
1) it is the subject of the verb in the relative clauseWhere is the new staff member that was at work yesterday?2) it is part of a non-identifying relative clauseThe trees that at one time lined this road have all been cut down.
Leaving out who, which, thatYou can leave out who, which, that when:
1) it replaces the object of the verb in the relative clauseCan I borrow the CD (that) you bought?
Note that in identifying relative clauses, where which thing or person talked about is clear without the relative clause, it is very common in spoken English to leave out who, which, that.
With these simple rules you should be able to use relative clauses more effectively and improve the quality of your business writing.
· Guy Perring is Director, Professional Development Unit (PDU), at the British Council Malaysia. The PDU offers a wide range of learning opportunities from management and communication skills training to developing English skills. Visit us at www.britishcouncil.org.my.

Unquote

My comments of June 25, 2006

Quote

I refer to the Article headlined "Relatively speaking" under THE BUSINESS OF ENGLISH in STARTWO of June 23 which is (together with many others in the series) of great educational value.
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_relative_clauses has stated, among other things,"In their choice of relative pronoun, English-speakers will often distinguish between an antecedent that is a human - who(m) and an antecedent that is a non-human - which. ......Note that whose, while sometimes reserved for human antecedents, is commonly found also with nonhuman ones; and that that, while reserved for nonhuman antecedents by some writers, is also often found with human ones."
In the concluding paragraph of the same Section, it, however, states, "Some writers follow a normative rule that that should be used only in identifying relative clauses and which should be used only in non-identifying relative clauses, in cases where the antecedent is a non-human; for humans, who and whom would be used, depending on grammatical case, and irrespective of whether the clause is identifying or non-identifying. However, many writers do not adhere to this rule, and in particular, which is widely used for non-humans in both types of clauses."

A job applicant following the uses as in two of the examples, "Where is the new staff member that was at work yesterday?" and “The client that I visited this morning, gave me his phone number” quoted in the aforesaid Article may face a risk of his/her application being turned down should his/her prospective employer consider such uses as inappropriate; and the applicant will be left with no chance to defend himself/herself since normally no reason will be given for the rejection.
Adopting the uses as in the revised forms reading, "Where is the new staff member who was at work yesterday?" and “The client whom I visited this morning, gave me his phone number”, he/she will avoid such an unnecessary risk.

Kengt, Penang

Unquote

The writer’s reply

Quote

Thanks for your comments. My own view is that whom is a little old fashioned and that although grammatically correct is rarely used in spoken English. I think you are correct about the first example and who would be safer to use.
All the best

Guy

Unquote