Omitting relative pronoun 'where'

Question

"My parents' house is the place where I feel most at home."

Could we omit 'where' from the sentence above (as below)?

1) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home."

Furthermore, if we did omit it, would it then be necessary to add the preposition 'at' / 'in' (as below)?

2) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home at."

I lean towards 2) being grammatically correct because 'where' refers to place, and if we omit it then we need something to allude to place, i.e. a preposition of place.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

Anonymous"My parents' house is the place where I feel most at home."Could we omit 'where' from the sentence above (as below)?1) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home."

Yes, you can omit "where".

AnonymousFurthermore, if we did omit it, would it then be necessary to add the preposition 'at' / 'in' (as below)?2) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home at."

No, it is not necessary to add anything. In fact, I recommend against it.

AnonymousI lean towards 2) being grammatically correct because 'where' refers to place, and if we omit it then we need something to allude to place

The words "house", "place", and "home" are already in the sentence. Nothing more is needed to allude to place.

CJ

BillJ · Answer

Anonymous"My parents' house is the place where I feel most at home."Could we omit 'where' from the sentence above (as below)?1) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home."Furthermore, if we did omit it, would it then be necessary to add the preposition 'at' / 'in' (as below)?2) "My parents' house is the place I feel most at home at."I lean towards 2) being grammatically correct because 'where' refers to place, and if we omit it then we need something to allude to place, i.e. a preposition of place.

Yes, you can omit "where", in which case it becomes a 'bare' relative. I've 'gapped' (__) its grammatical location in the relative clause:

"My parents' house is the place I feel most at home __."

Within the relative clause, "where" (or 'gap') functions as a locative adjunct co-indexed to "place" / "my parents house". The "at" / "in" component is contributed by "where" (or in this case 'gap') together with its locative function. So we understand that you feel most at home at / in 'the place', i.e. your parents' house.

BillJ

Anonymous · Answer

Hi CJ,

Thanks for your reply. Indeed you're right, it does not sound good to include the preposition at the end, as you suggested yourself. The thing I find most interesting is that in other examples, where the relative pronoun is other than 'where', we can (and must?) include the preposition at the end of the relative clause. For example:

"John is the person. I get on with John" --> "John is the person I get on with." (Here we need the preposition 'with')
"What's that music? You're listening to the music." --> "What's that music you're listening to?" (Here we need 'to')

Is 'where' then a 'special' preposition which can be alluded to through the object, whereas other relative pronouns cannot?

Thanks,
C

Anonymous · Answer

Hi BillJ,

Thanks for your reply. I won't duplicate my response to the other reply, but I'll say that I've always said the sentence without the relative pronoun and extra preposition, but suddenly questioned the grammar. Also, I'll admit I hadn't heard of the 'locative adjunct', 'locative function' or the 'bare relative' - it's above my linguistic knowledge at this time - and I'll add it to my vocabulary!

Thanks again.

C
locative adjunct co-indexed

BarbaraPA · Answer

Where does not need the "at." It's already included in the meaning.

I read an interesting article on the older words where, whither, and whence and in modern English they are where, to where, and from where. The article suggests that we don't like the lack of parallelism and that's why some people try to make "where" use the "at."

Don't do it. Just don't.

Omitting relative pronoun 'where'

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions