0
Pinenut Posted 21 years ago
Linguistics Studies

Could you help me with an authorative reference?

A friend of mine always carries sweets with her and offers them to anyone she feels has been particularly helpful.
A friend of mine always carries sweets with her and offers them to anyone who she feels has been particularly helpful.

It's one job area a college student can safely bet will exist after graduation.
It's one job area which a college student can safely bet will exist after graduation.

You have the right to elect and choose a person you think will represent your interests.
You have the right to elect and choose a person who you think will represent your interests.

Choose a person you think will get this done.
Choose a person who you think will get this done.

The above four pairs of sentences are some examples illustraing a grammar rule where the subject relative pronoun is omitted when a clause such as I believe, I think, I bet, and I feel is inserted between it and its verb.

http://tinyurl.com/ar49v<-- I can find a lot more examples by google search.

There is no question in my mind that the above-mentioned usage is common and legitimate. However, I've been unable to find an authorative reference from which I can draw my authority to convince others to accept this grammatical rule.

Do anyone of you know a reference or more?

pine
  

Top answer

I am not clear on this, Pinenut-- the omission of restrictive relative pronouns is accepted, at least informally, in many other cases as well: OMITTED RELATIVE, CONTACT CLAUSES These two terms are used, along with others, to describe the common and perfectly acceptable practice of omitting the relative pronoun from a restrictive clause or restrictive modifier: Here’s the dress Mother brought me. There is the woman I’m going to marry. Two centuries ago people argued that all relatives ought to be stated, as in the dress that Mother brought, or the woman whom [ that ] I’m going to marry, and a few people still insist that omitting relatives be limited to Informal or Semiformal writing and the Conversational levels, while others consider the omission suitable only to conversation.

— Mister Micawber

  • I am not clear on this, Pinenut-- the omission of restrictive relative pronouns is accepted, at least informally, in many other cases as well: OMITTED RELATIVE, CONTACT CLAUSES These two terms are used, along with others, to describe the common and perfectly acceptable practice of omitting the relative pronoun from a restrictive clause or restrictive modifier: Here’s the dress Mother brought me.
  • There is the woman I’m going to marry.
  • Two centuries ago people argued that all relatives ought to be stated, as in the dress that Mother brought, or the woman whom [ that ] I’m going to marry, and a few people still insist that omitting relatives be limited to Informal or Semiformal writing and the Conversational levels, while others consider the omission suitable only to conversation.
  • It is a matter of tone or style, not of correctness: sometimes omitted relatives can sound a bit more relaxed than the situation may require, and on other occasions including the relative pronoun may seem a bit ponderous or stiff.
  • Standard English accepts either.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

19 Answers
0
I am not clear on this, Pinenut-- the omission of restrictive relative pronouns is accepted, at least informally, in many other cases as well:

OMITTED RELATIVE, CONTACT CLAUSES
0
0
If I understand you correctly, you believe there is a rule that requiresthe omission of the relative pronoun in the situations discussed. But there is no such rule. You are free to include or exclude that pronoun. Maybe that's why it has been so hard for you to find a reference which states this 'requirement' as a rule.
0
0
CalifJimIf I understand you correctly, you believe there is a rule that requiresthe omission of the relative pronoun in the situations discussed. But there is no such rule. You are free to include or exclude that pronoun. Maybe that's why it has been so hard for you to find a reference which states this 'requirement' as a rule.
0
0
Mister Micawber I am not clear on this, Pinenut-- the omission of restrictive relative pronouns is accepted, at least informally, in many other cases as well.
Am I missing something?


I am sorry to say you missed the point.

I am not talking about the situations where the object gap (the relative pronouns used as objects of t
0
0
OK, Pinenut. Now I'm with you. It has to do with "leaving a trace". If the trace would be immediately in the same position as the relative pronoun, you can't omit the pronoun. It the trace is farther down the string of words, you can. It seems to me I have read about this somewhere - in an authoritative reference - just what you're looking for -- but I just can't think where it was. I'
0
0
Thanks for your help, Califjim.
I hope you will find it soon. By the way, what is 'trace'? Is it a new grammar term? I've never heard of it before.



pinenut

(edited for formatting purpose)
0
0
Pinenut,

Heavens, no! "trace" has been around for at least 30 years. It's part of the terminology of Transformational Grammar. In fact, you might try googling that to see what you get. You may find the answer you're looking for.

I checked some of my books, but I didn't find that particular "rule". I've given up for now.

CJ
0
0
In a more rough way, the 'rule' that I have is that when you encounter a new person in the clause you can omit the relative pronoun:
1 Paul was the guy [who / that] I thought was going to leave first.
2 Paul was the guy who / that was going to leave first.

In the first sentence we are talking about Paul, but then, we have a new person who can represent a new action: I
0
0
Hi Pinenet,

My question is off the topic and I see the following question in your post.

Do anyone of you know a reference or more? -- Is it grammatically correct? Shouldn't be "Does anyone of you know a reference or more?".
0
0
It should be "does anyone of you etc..."
0

Related Questions