Let me add to Karl's comment what MWDEU says (p. 956):
"The use of which to refer to a whole sentence or clause, or as the OED
puts it, to a fact, circumstance, or statement, was at one time
considered a mistake.  Thus Lurie 1927 could take Charles Reade and
Charles Dickens to task for such use.  The argument was, of course, that
which should refer to a specific antecedent.  But even Lurie had to
admit that the authorities did not all disapprove the use, and almost
all modern commentators find it acceptable.  Some of them warn against
the possibility of ambiguity when it is uncertain whether the which
refers to a preceding clause or to a noun at the end of it.  Their
ambiguous examples are, for the most part, not very ambiguous, but the
clarity of the reference is an important consideration that you need to
keep in mind."

In other words, there's nothing wrong with using "which" to refer to a
clause, sentence, or implication, as long as the reference is clear.  

Herb

-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 10:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Which as demonstrative pronoun?

What's the reason for thinking that this isn't still a relative pronoun?
Although we tend to chide our students for fragments, professional
writers use them all the time for emphasis. Absent the full context, my
own assumption is that we just have a relative clause here, punctuated
as a complete sentence.

As for dates, if we ignore punctuation and look at the basic syntax,
'which' as the subject goes back to early Middle English, and its use in
broad reference to a preceding clause from the at least the end of the
14th century. (The OED's earliest citation is from Gower.) Personally,
I've always thought that usage books strain at gnats when they object to
this construction. Sometimes it can be ambiguous, but often it is not.

Karl Hagen
Department of English
Mount St. Mary's College


Edgar Schuster wrote:

> I have noticed "which" used as a sort of demonstrative pronoun quite
> frequently in the New York Times, as in today's "Which is one reason
> Gov. Tom Vilsack is optimistic about John Kerry's chances . . . ."
> Does anyone know how long this usage has been around?
>
> Ed SchusterTo 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/