|
Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
iloveyou
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 72
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 6:38 am Post subject: it is that ~ emphasis |
 |
|
Hello,
Can I omit that in "it is that emphasis"?
For example
It was Jane (who/that) waited Tom in the park at night
It was Tom (whom/that) Jane waited in the park at night
It was in the park (where/that) Jane waited Tom
It was at night (when/that) Jane waited Top in the park
Thanks
Yun |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
redset
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 582
Location: England
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here - do you want to omit all of the words in brackets, e.g. 'it was Jane waited Tom in the park at night'?
(By the way, waited needs a preposition if it's taking an object - Jane waited for Tom, with Tom, near Tom etc.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iloveyou
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 72
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:54 pm Post subject: yes |
|
|
I want to omit the whole bracket part...
is it grammartically allowed?
Thanks.
Yun |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dragn
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Posts: 450
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
It was Jane (who/that) waited Tom in the park at night
It was Tom (whom/that) Jane waited in the park at night
It was in the park (where/that) Jane waited Tom
It was at night (when/that) Jane waited Top in the park |
Here's the basic sentence:
Jane waited for Tom in the park at night.
Jane is the subject, Tom is the object, in the park is a prepositional phrase, and at night is an adverbial prepositional phrase.
Here's the deal: you can omit a relative pronoun if it refers to the object of a verb or preposition in a restrictive relative clause. This takes care of the first and second sentences right off the bat.
1. It was Jane who/that/(�?) waited for Tom in the park at night.
The relative pronouns who and that clearly refer to Jane, the subject. As a result, you cannot omit the relative pronoun here. A quick, easy way to check this rule is to note that the relative pronoun in this case is followed by a verb (waited). This is often the case when the relative pronoun refers to the subject.
Now for the second sentence:
2. It was Tom whom/that/(�?) Jane waited for in the park at night.
Here, the relative pronouns whom and that clearly refer to Tom, the object. Now you can omit the relative pronoun:
It was Tom Jane waited for in the park at night.
Again, a quick, easy way to check this rule is to note that in this case the relative pronoun is not followed by a verb: it is followed by a noun or a pronoun (Jane). This is often the case when the relative pronoun refers to the object.
In the third sentence, we have problems. First of all, this version of the sentence is open to misinterpretation. If you use either the relative pronoun that or the relative adverb where or neither one, you have opened the door to a different interpretation of the sentence.
3. It was in the park where/that/(�?) Jane waited for Tom at night. (?)
This sentence could be interpreted to mean that we are talking about a certain park. What park are we talking about? The one in which Jane waited for Tom at night. That is not the meaning of our basic sentence. The verdict: Don't write the sentence this way!
Note that it is occasionally possible to omit a relative adverb, but usually only if the relative clause comes at the end of the sentence, and the meaning shines through very clearly. For example:
The video arcade is the place where Tony hangs out.
The video arcade is the place Tony hangs out.
In many such cases, however, a preposition must be added to clarify the meaning:
This is the town where I was born.
This is the town I was born. (?)
In this case the relative adverb where is a substitute for the phrase in which. The problem is that the word born alone doesn't quite get the job done. As a result, the preposition in needs to be added to complete the meaning:
This is the town I was born in.
This is not necessary with hang out because the preposition is built into the meaning of this two-word verb: to spend time in a place.
In the fourth sentence, at least we don't have to worry about any misinterpretation; the pattern may be awkward, but at least there is only one way to interpret it.
4. It was at night when/that/(�?) Jane waited for Tom in the park.
As far as this sentence goes, omitting the relative pronoun that or relative adverb when is questionable:
It was at night Jane waited for Tom in the park. (?)
I wouldn't write this...not in a hundred years. In my opinion, the reader has to spend a few too many milliseconds intuiting the correct meaning. To me, that makes omission not a viable option here.
I've been struggling with parts of this question for days now, and I'd be interested to get some additional insight from other teachers.
You know iloveyou, I can only speak for myself, but I do this because I often learn more than the posters. I do it because it makes me a better teacher.  It may seem like I do it for you, but down deep I do it for myself...and ultimately for my own students.
Hope this helps. I know it helped me. 
Greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
