Relative clause

Question

Hi.I have learnt that relative clause should go immediately after the noun it describes. I wonder if this rule should be applied in every context.The house which we stayed last night was comfortable.Can't we say the house was comfortable which we stayed last night. Since which refers to house, so grammatically speaking the first one should be used. But the second one sounds right to me. Thanks for your help

Cool Breeze · Accepted Answer

Both are wrong. Say: The house [which/that] we stayed in last night was comfortable. Or: The house in which we stayed last night was comfortable. In other words, you cannot "stay a place" because stay can't be used transitively in this context. You have to say "to stay in a place".

CB

Rover_KE · Answer

. . .and no - it would be wrong to say The house was comfortable which we stayed in last night.

It would be unwise to say this rule should be applied in every context.

If I did, somebody would be sure to prove me wrong. Let's just say . . . in most contexts.

Rover

Dimsumexpress · Answer

My opinion ;

hrsaneiThe house which we stayed last night was comfortable. OK
hrsaneithe house was comfortable which we stayed last night.
No! that's not grammatical.

If the context were: I really like the house on 42nd abd Brian, which my husband and I looked at 3 times. Then It is fine. To translate your version, it will be: I like the house we stayed in last night which is very conmfortable

When we try to deliver a complex context, we have to determine where the main point lies and try to deliver the point without being wordy and cluttered. "Reduced clause" can be an effevtive tool. i.e. The hotel ~~[in which ]~~we stayed in last night was very comforatble.

CalifJim · Answer

hrsaneiCan't we say the house was comfortable which we stayed last night.

In the general case of postponing a relative clause until later in the sentence, yes, you can do that, but only under certain conditions, namely, that the clause is so long that it interrupts the flow of the main clause in which it is embedded. In my judgment, the clause "which we stayed in last night" is not quite long enough to qualify, so I don't recommend the postponement of the relative clause in this case.

Here's another case, where repositioning the relative clause might make more sense, though either version is fine:

They consider anyone who so much as speaks to a member of the occupying army a traitor.

They consider anyone a traitor who so much as speaks to a member of the occupying army.¹

You cannot move the relative clause outside the scope of the clause it originates in. It can only be moved as far right as the end of its clause - and not further.

OK: Tom always maintains a woman who was wearing a fur coat entered the room whenever he is asked about it.

OK: Tom always maintains a woman entered the room who was wearing a fur coat whenever he is asked about it.

Wrong: Tom always maintains a woman entered the room whenever he is asked about it who was wearing a fur coat.¹

CJ

¹Borrowed from Syntactic Argumentation and the Structure of English (Soames & Perlmutter).

Hrsanei · Answer

Hi.

Thank you very much all for your great explanation.

Relative clause

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions