0
AVim Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

whose vs 'of which' in clause?

I am reading Longman English Grammar now, in which it says both the sentences
"In 1980 he caught a serious illness from whose effects he still suffers." and "In 1980 he caught a serious illness the effects of which he still suffers from." have the same meaning.

Well, may I deduce that I may write the sentence
"He is the man from whose house the pictures were stolen."
into
"He is the man the house of whom the pictures were stolen from." ??

I need your confirmation, thanks!
  

Top answer

With all respect to Longman, I don't much like "from whose effects" because "whose" sounds like a person, and not a thing. Your second sentence, in pink, may be grammatical, but it's tortured. Of the two, take the first.

— BarbaraPA

  • With all respect to Longman, I don't much like "from whose effects" because "whose" sounds like a person, and not a thing.
  • Your second sentence, in pink, may be grammatical, but it's tortured.
  • Of the two, take the first.
  • It was from his house [that] the pictures were stolen.
  • )
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.

12 Answers
0
With all respect to Longman, I don't much like "from whose effects" because "whose" sounds like a person, and not a thing.

Your second sentence, in pink, may be grammatical, but it's tortured. Of the two, take the first.

It was from his house [that] the pictures were stolen. (Actually, He was the one whose pictures were stolen, but that doesn't help you with the construction.)
0
0
... may I deduce that I may write the sentence
"He is the man from whose house the pictures were stolen."
into as "He is the man the house of whom the pictures were stolen from." ??
Yes and no. It seems sound structurally as an application of the pattern just above it. But since
0
0
Thank you guys.

CalifJim The best comparison is with my house, which can be written as the house of me, but is never actually written that way. Likewise, man whose house is not at all natural when transformed to man the house of whom.

what about writing 'my house' as 'house of mine'? Is it natural?
0
0
It shows up in songs: Can't help loving that man of mine and This little light of mine.

A good friend of mine sounds totally normal.

It seems okay with this, that, and a, but odd with the.
0
0
Wwhat about writing 'my house' as 'house of mine'? Is it natural?
As GG says, not with the. Both the house of me and the house of mine are unnatural. With the latter you could 'save' it by adding a restrictive relative clause (the house of mine that I sold in 1998), but nothing can save the house of
0
0
Unless you were an incredibly egotistical fashion-line designer. The house of Dior has nothing on "the house of ME" Emotion: smile
0
0
Although I know it's not the same as "my house", as you recommended, I will choose
"a house of mine", which means "one of my houses", instead of "the house of mine".
0
0
I was just joking. The only other time I've seen "the house of..." used was in fashion. Please ignore my post as it relates to your quesiton.

Yes, "a house of mine" says that you have more than one house.
0
0
Grammar GeekWith all respect to Longman, I don't much like "from whose effects" because "whose" sounds like a person, and not a thing.

I almost foget to mention it is said in the book that native English speakers treat 'whose' as the possessive of 'who'. Thanks for your reminder.
0
0
Grammar GeekUnless you were an incredibly egotistical fashion-line designer. The house of Dior has nothing on "the house of ME"
0

Related Questions