Episode Transcript

Which Versus That
Episode 8: March 21, 2008

[The Creative Commons image isn't showing up in the video as well as I'd like, so thanks to these Flickr users for contributing photos: jameswest, librarianavengers, sixesandsevens, douglasearl, and curtisg.] 

 

Grammar Girl here. Today's show is a new and improved version of the elusive episode seven: which versus that.

If you're confused about that versus which, don't feel bad. It's one of the most common topics people ask me about. I used to work as a technical writer, and I'd often edit documents in which people used the wrong word. More than once, I'd put in the right word, only to have clients change a perfectly fine that to a which and send it back to me. In fact, having a client try to overrule my correction of a which to a that was one of the things that pushed me over the edge and made me start the Grammar Girl podcast.

Here's the deal: some people will argue that the rules are more complex and flexible than this, but I like to make things as simple as possible, so I say that you use that before a restrictive clause and which before everything else.

Restrictive Clause--That

A restrictive clause is just part of a sentence that you can't get rid of because it specifically restricts some other part of the sentence. Here's an example:

  • Gems that sparkle often elicit forgiveness.

The words that sparkle restrict the kind of gems you're talking about. Without them, the meaning of the sentence would change. Without them, you'd be saying that all gems elicit forgiveness, not just the gems that sparkle. (And note that you don't need commas around the words that sparkle.)

Nonrestrictive Clause--Which

A nonrestrictive clause is something that can be left off without changing the meaning of the sentence. You can think of a nonrestrictive clause as simply additional information. Here's an example:
  • Diamonds, which are expensive, often elicit forgiveness.

Alas, in Grammar Girl's world, diamonds are always expensive, so leaving out the words which are expensive doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. (Also note that the phrase is surrounded by commas. Nonrestrictive clauses are usually surrounded by, or preceded by, commas.) Here's another example:
  • There was an earthquake in China, which is bad news.


Expendable--Which

If you leave off the clause that says which is bad news, it doesn't change the meaning of the rest of the sentence.

A quick and dirty tip (with apologies to Wiccans and Hermione Granger) is to remember that you can throw out the “whiches” and no harm will be done. You use which in nonrestrictive clauses, and if you eliminate a nonrestrictive clause, the meaning of the remaining part of the sentence will be the same as it was before.

Needed--That


On the other hand, if it would change the meaning to throw out the clause, you need a that. Do all cars use hybrid technology? No. So you would say,

 

"Cars that have hybrid technology get great gas mileage."


Is every leaf green? No. So you would say,

 

"Leaves that are green contain chlorophyll.


It would change the meaning to throw out the clause in those examples, so you need a that. (Also note that the that clause isn't surrounded by commas. Restrictive clauses usually aren't set off by commas.)

Remembering to use that with restrictive clauses and which with nonrestrictive clauses is the best method, but the quick and dirty tip of using which when you could throw out the clause will also get you to the right answer most of the time.

Video of Your Photos

This week, in honor of it being almost my 100th episode, there's a video on the website made up of Creative Commons photos people posted to the Grammar Girl Flickr group. You can find the video in the transcript of this show at quickanddirtytips.com. I can only promise that it will be up there for a week, so go check it out now.

Administrative Stuff

There are also links on the website where you can find a transcript of this episode, my contact information, all the other Quick and Dirty Tips podcasts, and preorder my print book. Not only will you be the first one on your block to get it, but some sites are also offering extra discounts on preorders. Check it out. Preorder now!

That's all. Thanks for listening.


Comments (19) for Which Versus That |  Subscribe to Comment

krista Says:
6/4/2008 9:30:43 PM
Some designers in our company have been debating and I thought you could clarify. Are there two spaces after every sentence or one?
Tom Says:
4/18/2008 1:56:13 PM
Please! Just say or write "Hybrid cars get great gas mileage." Noun and adjective should be kept together. It's the way English works best. Splitting them apart with superfluous "that" phrases or "which" phrases is the mark of a poor writer and a poor speaker, regardless of grammatical correctness. Nonrestrictive phrases often result in silly pedantic sentences. "Diamonds, which are expensive, often elicit forgiveness." What a condescending statement. It's almost insulting. Diamonds are expensive? No kidding? It would be far better just to say, "Expensive diamonds often elicit forgiveness." Restrictive phrases often result in stilted and awkward sentences because of the backward reference. I suppose one might occasionally have use for a sentence such as, "Leaves that are green contain chlorophyll." However it would be better just to say, "Green leaves contain chlorophyll." Can you imagine Melville writing, "Whales that are white I must chase?" Carroll used restrictive phrases to good effect in writing his pleasant nonsense. I'm sure he would have been quite pleased with a sentence such as, "Rabbits that use watches are not late." But the rest of us should stick to simple English and avoid "that" and "which" constructions.
John Says:
4/13/2008 9:39:59 PM
"The M-W machine has contributed to the inability of school children in America to differentiate between good and bad grammar." So I guess you were one of the people who called the 3rd edition of M-W's dictionary in 1961 "bolshevist" and a "political pamphlet" for being descriptivist?
rpmason Says:
4/8/2008 4:49:59 PM
Goofy, I wouldn't expect novelists to use the CMoS, which is suited to academic, scientific, and technical writers. I’ve commented before on the descriptive tendencies of nearly every Merriam-Webster reference book. <tfic> The M-W machine has contributed to the inability of school children in America to differentiate between good and bad grammar. Next, they’ll include leet-speak in their dictionaries, w00t** d00d!#!$#$!#!$. *<tfic> – tongue firmly in cheek. **M-W’s 2007 ‘Word of the Year’
goofy Says:
4/1/2008 12:32:16 PM
Not everyone agrees with The Chicago Manual of Style. According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, "which" can be both restrictive and nonrestrictive. The Columbia Guide to Standard American English gives the same advice. According to MWDEU, there is no difference in the actual usage of American and British writers - both use "which" restrictively and nonrestrictively. In fact, a 1977 study reports that 75% of the "whiches" in edited prose introduce restrictive clauses. Look in any novel, and I'll bet you'll find some restrictive whiches (not proceeded by prepositions).
rpmason Says:
4/1/2008 9:52:07 AM
Kuma, In British English, the two are interchangeable; in American English, they're not. According to the Chicago Manual of Style, 'which' can only be used restrictively when preceded by a preposition -- such as, 'The game in which I won a prize' vs. 'The game that I won a prize in'.
John Says:
3/28/2008 6:33:43 PM
Kuma, what you learned was correct. The rule that GG discusses has never been followed by good writers.
Kuma Takamura Says:
3/27/2008 4:48:03 PM
I grew up in Japan. When I ws taking English grammer classes some 40 yeras ago, we were taught that "taht" and "which" are completely interchangeable as restirictive relative pronoun, while non-restrictive has to be "which". Has rule changed or what I learned was incorrect?
rpmason Says:
3/27/2008 10:42:15 AM
Charly, you're absolutely right, in mainstream technical writing, we typically don't use contractions and Latin. That said, it depends on the document and the audience. The 'Engineer's Guide to Pressure Equipment' would be written in a formal style. However, in documents such as a FAQ, an gaming guide, or a blog, an informal conversational style can be appropriate. --rpmason
Charly G Polite Says:
3/27/2008 1:10:36 AM
Grammar Girl wrote: "I used to work as a technical writer...." I always thought that in technical writing you are supposed to spell out the words, i.e. If you are confused, not "If you're confused..", Do not feel bad, in lieu of "don't feel bad It is one.. instead of "It's one..". etc. Please refer to your opening statement in this page. please advice CGC, P.Eng
The Green Faery Says:
3/27/2008 12:13:23 AM
I often tell my students to follow the "that/which" rule when using both in a sentence (where "that" comes first and "which" comes next). Does this work, do you think? I consider the use of too many "thats" in a single sentence a personal pet peeve. I also like to alternate "that" and "which", where possible, among linked sentences. To my mind (or ear?), this is like alternating "the" and "a" within a single sentence or among linked sentences. While not always possible, it seems to work in terms of style and clarity. For ninth-graders, it's all about simplicity. I'd love to know what anyone else there thinks!
kandii Says:
3/26/2008 10:41:17 AM
wow you can learn alot with this web page well thankz fo the help..:)
goofy Says:
3/24/2008 12:05:58 PM
In standard written English, it's not "that/which" that marks the difference between restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses, it's the comma. "Which" is used for both restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses, and "that" is used for restrictive clauses. Advice to the contrary ignores how English is used by the best writers. It was a concern which brought just employment enough. (Jane Austen, Emma, chapter 2) However, she soon made out that she was in the pool of tears which she had wept when she was nine feet high. (Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, chapter 2) He lived in chambers which had once belonged to his deceased partner. (Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol, Stave 1) Buda-Pesth seems a wonderful place, from the glimpse which I got of it from the train and the little I could walk through the streets. (Bram Stoker, Dracula, chapter 1) I think I can see a little into the springs and motives which being cunningly presented to me under various disguises (Herman Melville, Moby Dick, chapter 1) and Mrs. Heathcliff leaning over the fire, diverting herself with burning a bundle of matches which had fallen from the chimney-piece as she restored the tea-canister to its place (Emily Bronte, Wuthering Heights, chapter 2)
Grammar Girl Says:
3/23/2008 1:55:50 AM
Thanks for pointing out the error.
Dan Says:
3/22/2008 8:34:32 PM
Aw, who's in charge of transcribing the podcast? I mean, "eExpendible"? ;)
FMLyons Says:
3/21/2008 12:49:50 PM
how do i get to reply to you my twitter friend?
Julie Says:
3/21/2008 12:25:20 PM
How timely. I was just searching your site last night for this and here it is. Yay.
Grammar Girl Says:
3/21/2008 12:24:14 PM
Hi, Tricia. I covered "toward" versus "towards" on this page: http://tinyurl.com/34rpwk
Tricia Says:
3/21/2008 12:15:23 PM
Thanks for the lesson. How about explaining when you use toward and towards. I'm a toward person, but several people in my writing group always use towards.

Add Comment

 *
 *
 *
  Image to deter spam submissions
  To deter spam submissions, please type the letters from the image into the box below:
 *
 
  Fields marked with "*" are required