Job Discussion Forums

[Blistering Zanazilz]

This morning a student asked me a question about relative pronouns and clauses she recently came across. Here are her 2 examples:

1. We often visit our friends in New York. It isn't very far away. Using a non-restrictive clause this can become "We often visit our friends in New York, which isn't very far away."

2. She left the college. She spent four eventful years there. Using a non-restrictive clause this becomes "She left the college, where she spent four eventful years."

In example 1 the student wanted to write "We often visit our friends in New York, where isn't very far away" since "where" usually signifies location, but I pointed out that's incorrect (should be which). I couldn't give her a reason why, but if anyone here can help with an explanation I'd appreciate it.

[bograt]

I'd explain this by saying 'where' is used if there is an indirect object ie 'to which' or 'in which', not only for locations.

E.g. compare 'I stayed in a hotel' and 'I visited a hotel.'

That's the hotel where we stayed - That's the hotel which we visited.

In the second sentence she spent 4 years 'in' the college, so you need 'where'.

However in the first sentence New York is the subject - New York is far away, so 'where' is not used.

[nomad soul]

[fluffytwo]

Has the student actually thought about the meaning of '(W)here isn't far away' (which here isn't a question, and an odd-sounding fragment compared to '(W)hich isn't far away', which at least "follows on" and very straightforwardly from what precedes it).

But hey, let's change the first example sentence(s) so 'where' becomes acceptable: We often visit our friends in New York, where <they> have a much richer social life (=than they did in e.g. Dayton, Ohio). There is an obvious parallel here with She regretfully left the college, where <she>'d spent four eventful years (and coming full circle, how about She regretfully left the college, which she'd spent four eventful years at/?in ('in' makes it sound like a prison eh. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether the..."stranded"? preposition is fine, but not stranding could leave things open to [unlikely] questions of We often visit our friends in New York, ?in which...*)).

Tl:dr is that we don't usually predicate much about '(W)here' itself (other than in questions about where BE, and/or [to] or from or [[at]], etc), though we may of course say what people or other subjects happen to do wherever. Note also that the substitution in the first sentence(s) isn't that different ultimately from the "movement" as it were of the 'there' to the 'where' position in the second one(s).


*If the string continued 'in which city...' (a bit like saying 'in winter, in December'?) then a) that would sound silly and stuffy and b) 'where' is a perfectly succinct "alternative" for as I say (re)introducing people or other subjects (and thus more action) rather than the "place" per se. Another full circle.

[fluffytwo]

So, what did the student make of the explanations offered here? Were they satisfactory, or still lacking in some way?