Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[Chan-Seung Lee]

[m_prime]

Hi Chan-Seung Lee

This is a really good question

To answer number 2 first: yes, you are right. 'It' is being used as a dummy subject here to refer back to nursing, the subject of the previous clause. The writer could have said "...important profession that nursing is today". It would have still made sense grammatically but would be very awkard and cumbersome for the reader.

However, 'that' does not refer back to important profession. 'That' is being used as a conjunction to introduce the third clause of the sentence - 'it is today'. It is a special type of conjunction called a 'that clause' (see M. Parrott), quite often when English speakers use this clause we leave out the word 'that' altogether. For example we could easily say;

We remember Florence Nightingale because she helped make nursing the important profession it is today.

The sentence still makes perfect sense.

I would advise you to be careful, and only leave out 'that' if you feel very confident about what you're doing. 'That' is a word used in many different grammatical contexts, sometimes it is absolutely essential!

I hope this explanation makes sense to you but if you are not sure then please let me know and I will try my best to answer your questions.

[Chan-Seung Lee]

[m_prime]

Hi Chan-Seung Lee

Yes, your right in both the examples you have given. I think that you have understood the point well.

In all three examples 'that' is acting as a conjunction between the main clause ('He is not the man' and the subordinate clause ('he was ten years ago'). Whether we use 'that' is entirely optional, the sentence will work grammatically either way. As a general rule, 'that' is included more often in written English and less in spoken English.

The reason that 'that' is optional (and therefore operating as a conjunction) is because each of the subordinate clauses already have a subject - 1. he, 2. she & 3. it. If the subordinate clause did not have a subject then the inclusion of 'that' becomes mandatory.

Example
'I tried to help a child was crying' does not work. The subordinate (or 'relative clause') - 'was crying' does not have a subject. Therefore a relative pronoun is needed to refer back to object of the main clause (the child).

'I tried to help a child that (or who) was crying".

If we introduce a normal pronoun, to act as the subject, into the subordinate clause (and rework it a little - note the inclusion of a new verb). 'That' becomes optional again and merely functions as a conjunction.

'I tried to help a child (that) I found crying'

To summarise: if a subordinate clause has a subject 'that' is usually optional. If the subordinate clause does not have a subject a relative pronoun is required (that, which, who, etc).

I hope this still continues to make sense to you, it is pretty complicated stuff.

BTW - 'that clause' is not my term, I got it from a book. As I said, you asked a really good question!