Clauses

Question

Are these sentences correct (in the first two the clauses are nonrestrictive and in the second two they are restrictive)::

1-We painted the door of the building , which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building had one door. The door, not the building, was beginning to look bad.)

2-I met the brother of Harry , who is about my age. (Harry's brother -not Harry- is about my age.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3-We painted that door of the building which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building has more than one door. We painted the one that was beginning to look pretty bad.)

4-I met that brother of Harry how is about my age. (Harry has more than one brother. I met the one who is about my age.)

Gratefully,
Navi.

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

Hi Navi;

It is not the relative pronoun that makes a clause restrictive or nonrestrictive, it is the commas that set the clause off from the rest of the sentence. The determiners are fine. Your sentences with relative pronouns are fine, too.

3-We painted the door of the building which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building has more than one door. We painted the one that was beginning to look pretty bad.)

4-I met Harry's brother who is about my age. (Harry has more than one brother. I met the one who is about my age.) This is restrictive.
I met Harry's brother, who is about my age. (Non restrictive)
I met Harry's brother; the one who is about my age. (Even clearer than the restricted clause version.)

Navitasan · Answer

Thank you very much AlpheccaStars,
I think I have not formulated my question properly. That happens quite often with me.

It seems to me that this one
3-We painted the door of the building which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building has more than one door. We painted the one that was beginning to look pretty bad.)

would mean that the building was beginning to look pretty bad. Using "that door" instead of "the door" makes it clear that the door is beginning to look pretty bad.

I am not sure that the non-restrictive relative clauses in the first two, refer respectively to "the door" and to "the brother of Harry", They might refer to "the building" and to "Harry". So at best the sentences are ambiguous. That is not really a problem for me. The question is whether a non-restrictive clause in that position could refer to the first noun.

1-We painted the door of the building , which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building had one door. The door, not the building, was beginning to look bad.)
2-I met the brother of Harry , who is about my age. (Harry's brother -not Harry- is about my age.)

Gratefully,
Navi.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

The question is whether a non-restrictive clause in that position could refer to the first noun. I don't think so, the context is pretty clear. The door was looking bad, and the brother is about your age..

It seems to me that this one
3-We painted the door of the building which was beginning to look pretty bad. (The building has more than one door. We painted the one that was beginning to look pretty bad.)

would mean that the building was beginning to look pretty bad. Using "that door" instead of "the door" makes it clear that the door is beginning to look pretty bad.

No, it doesn't matter if you use the or that. It does not change the reference.
It is pretty clear to me that you didn't paint the building, so "look pretty bad" must be referring to the door that was painted, not the building.

If you want to make it clearer, use "because." That removes the relative pronoun "which."
Because it was beginning to look pretty bad, we painted the door of the building.
We painted the door of the building because it was beginning to look pretty bad

And we seldom use brother of Harry, preferring instead: Harry's brother.

Clauses

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions