Thank you, Herb. Rarely does a day go by that I don't learn something
valuable from members of this list! I am grateful for your willingness to
help those of us whose background is lacking. I love teaching grammar, but I
always feel as if I'm scrambling to fill the many gaps in my background of
knowledge about the subject.
I will look forward to the handout.
Best,
Nancy
Nancy L. Tuten, PhD
Professor of English
Director of the Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program
Columbia College
Columbia, South Carolina
[log in to unmask]
803-786-3706
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of STAHLKE, HERBERT F
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 11:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The use of "that"
Nancy,
I agree with your advice, though not with all of your analysis. Let me
start by admitting that I didn't express myself very clearly about your
example. It was, in fact, a good example of a sentence that's badly
constructed. Sorry about that.
I would say that the two sentences I gave are, in fact, very much alike, and
in the way that is crucial to what we're discussing. However, making that
point takes us back to an old and long discussion on the list a few years
ago about the lexical category status of "that" in the two sentences. Most
of the standard grammars treat "that" in the two sentences
(1) Molly hates that Fred isn't coming to the party.
(2) He's the man that met me at the airport.
as the same thing, a subordinating conjunction. There is a long tradition
in school grammar and it some of the standard reference grammars to describe
them as two separate words, that(1) as a relative pronoun and that(2) as a
subordinating conjunction introducing noun clauses. Jespersen and
Huddleston&Pullum both give extensive arguments that I've posted here before
to support their analysis, but I've summarized a little of it in a class
handout that I'll send you separately. The gist of it is this:
1. Both are unstressed; the demonstrative is stressed, and relative
pronouns in wh- are at least lightly stressed. These are reduced to [D@t]
(voiced interdental fricative, schwa, /t/)/
2. Wh-relatives can occur as object of a preposition
(3) the students with whom you were working...
but "that" can't
(4) the students with *that you were working... vs.
the students you were working with....
3. "That" when used as a pronoun or demonstrative has the plural "those."
"That" as a subordinator does not.
(5) The people that/*those I met with...
4. Wh-relatives have a genitive form "whose." "That" introducing a
relative clause not only does not (and, of course, demonstrative pronoun
"that" lacks a genitive too, so this is a weaker argument).
Huddleston&Pullum have another page of arguments to the same effect.
5. The presence or absence of "that" in a relative clause and in a noun
clause are governed by similar conditions.
6. Omission of the relative marker has the same distribution as does
"that." It can't happen with possessives or after a preposition. In those
positions you have to use a wh-relative.
Whether the relative clause in "That's the man met me at the airport" is
ungrammatical depends on register. In speech it occurs readily, but it is,
as you say, ungrammatical in formal writing. "She lost the ring belonged to
my mother" also works in speech without "that."
A corollary of these arguments is that in a that-relative the relative
clause has a grammatical gap. The "that" is not a pronoun referring to that
gap, though. It's simply a subordinator.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Nancy Tuten
Sent: Sat 2/16/2008 9:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The use of "that"
Herb,
I'm not sure I see how those two sentences can be compared. The sentence
"That's the man met me at the airport" contains a relative clause with a
missing "who." In the sentence "I hate Fred isn't coming to the party," we
have a noun/nominal clause with a missing "that."
The relative clause in your airport sentence is ungrammatical without the
relative pronoun because that pronoun functions as the subject of the
relative clause. But "that" merely launches a noun clause in the "hate Fred"
sentence. Since the word "that" doesn't function in a key slot in the noun
clause, it seems that these are quite different kinds of sentences with
different functions of "that." In other words, aren't we mixing apples and
oranges?
When you say "Your first example is bad," do you mean that I have chosen an
example that doesn't fit the discussion or that the sentence is badly
constructed?
I agree with the latter meaning; the sentence is badly constructed without
the word "that" because it invites a misreading. I also agree that a
different verb--such as "know" or "remember"--would be less likely to invite
a misreading, but the possibility for a misreading is still there.
In sentences with relative clauses launched by the pronoun "that" or "who,"
the pronoun can probably be omitted as long as it is in the object slot and
not the subject slot of its own clause:
She lost the ring [that] I bought last week. ["That" is not necessary]
She lost the ring that belonged to my mother. ["That" is necessary]
I think I would give this advice to student writers: In some situations,
"that" is essential, in some cases it aids in the reading but might be
considered optional by some readers, and in some cases it is not necessary
and even makes the sentence wordy (as in the first example above this
paragraph).
Do you agree?
Nancy
Nancy L. Tuten, PhD
Professor of English
Director of the Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program
Columbia College
Columbia, South Carolina
[log in to unmask]
803-786-3706
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of STAHLKE, HERBERT F
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 8:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The use of "that"
Nancy,
You're first example is bad for the same reason that
That's the man met me at the airport.
is wrong. There is a position that Fred fills that's required by "hate,"
and so when you get to isn't you run into a parsing problem. A verb like
"know" more readily anticipates a clause, so
Mary knows Fred isn't coming to the party.
doesn't have the same problem, even though you can say "Mary knows Fred."
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Nancy Tuten
Sent: Sat 2/16/2008 10:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The use of "that"
How about in these examples?
Molly hates Fred isn't coming to the party.
Molly hates that Fred isn't coming to the party.
I would argue that the reader gets to the word "isn't" and realizes that
perhaps the thought that "Molly hates Fred" isn't what the writer intended.
The reader then has to start over and rethink the sentence. It seems to me
that it is the writer's job to keep the reader from doing that extra work.
There is no doubt that the word "that" is unnecessary in many cases.
However, when I train in the business world and when I teach in the college
classroom, I run into a lot of people who have been told to remove all their
"thats." I argue that they should decide on a case-by-case basis.
Nancy
Nancy L. Tuten, PhD
Professor of English
Director of the Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program
Columbia College
Columbia, South Carolina
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
803-786-3706
_____
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carol Morrison
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 9:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The use of "that"
As I am reading student essays today, I'm wondering if the use of "that,"
which many of the students tend to omit, is necessary in certain
circumstances and what function it serves. For instance:
1) I think that we should go to the grocery store today rather than Sunday.
vs.
2) I think we should go to the grocery store today rather than Sunday.
or, a 3rd person example, since the above are more representative of speech
than writing:
3) Jean thinks that Genuardi's is a better supermarket than Giant.
vs.
4) Jean thinks Genuardi's is a better supermarket than Giant.
My feeling is that "that" should be in the sentence. Does it function as a
complementizer in the above sentences? (I tend to get confused with "that"
clauses).
Thank you!
Carol Morrison
_____
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http:/www.yahoo.com/r/hs> your homepage.
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave
the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
