This is a short-term goal. This will also help me reach other goals.

Question

Hi all

This is a short-term goal. This will also help me reach other goals.

If I want to combine these two sentences togther, which way will preserve the meaning of the two sentences.

This is a short-term goal that will also help me reach other goals.

This is a short-term goal, which will also help me reach other goals.

Thanks

PBF

Mike in Japan · Accepted Answer

All looks fine, to me. Of course using "and" instead of "that" or "which" would make "also" redundant.

Avangi · Answer

PeaceblinkfriendThis is a short-term goal. This will also help me reach other goals.

If I want to combine these two sentences togther, which way will preserve the meaning of the two sentences.

This is a short-term goal that will also help me reach other goals.

This is a short-term goal, which will also help me reach other goals.I prefer the first one. I'd like it even better if you dropped the "also."

The clause is non-esential in the second one, which in my opinion makes it mean the fact that it's short term is what will help with the other goals.

Even if you removed the comma, I'd prefer the first one.

Peaceblinkfriend · Answer

Thanks for your replies, Mike and Avangi.

Avangi, as I'm trying to learn the '..., which...' construction, could you please tell me which part of the first clause were you referring to when you said '..., which in my opinion'? Is it deducible?

The clause is non-esential in the second one, which in my opinion makes it mean the fact that it's short term is what will help with the other goals.

Thank you again

PBF

Avangi · Answer

I'm not really expert in this stuff. It has to do with the antecedent of "which." What does which refer to??
The relative pronoun "which" becomes the subject of the relative clause. When the "which" clause is essential (no comma), the "which" usually refers to a single word shortly before the "which."

I prefer the investments which will give me the greatest short-term gain.

Both the main clause and the relative clause are grammatically complete, but neither makes semantic sense without the other.

The "which" clause refers to the noun "investments" and explains which investments I prefer. You can't reverse the process of your OP and split this into two independent sentences which make sense.

When the "which" clause is non-essential (with a comma), the "which" often refers to the entire main clause. It's usually possible to convert this to two separate sentences, or a single, compound sentence.

I chose a safe, secure investment, which gives me peace of mind.

I think "which" here refers to the whole main clause. It's the fact that I chose a safe investment which gives me peace of mind.
I can break this into two ideas: "I chose a safe secure investment." "This gives me peace of mind."
"I chose a safe investment, and this gives me peace of mind."

In some cases, by simply removing the comma you can convert to an essential clause, and change the meaning. "I chose an investment which gives me peace of mind." (This doesn't always work.)

Avangi · Answer

Peaceblinkfriend Is it deducible? I think so.

The clause is non-esential in the second one, which in my opinion makes it mean the fact that it's short term is what will help with the other goals. Sorry, I don't know if I answered this.

This sentence which I wrote by way of explanation is a case in point. With the comma before the "which," the which refers to the entire first clause, IMHO.

This is a short-term goal. This will also help me reach other goals.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions