Relative pronouns

[lucy black]

I wonder if I might ask a question

In the sentences

I think he is the man who did it or He is the man that I like

Why is it we can drop that, but not who?

[Stephen Jones]

You can't drop the relative when it's the subject.

Nor can you drop it in a non-defining clause - which is a different kettle of fish.

[fluffyhamster]

I'd firstly caution that "I think he is the man who/that did it" does not show an essential use of a defining relative pronoun (rather like the "Who is the sumotori who is Yokozuna?" example in the "The worst relative pronoun exercises you've ever seen..." thread!); I imagine it would be reduced simply to, "I think HE did it!".

Similarly, "He is the man (that) I like" is a little strange (it is a marked word order for the alternative "I like HIM"...or, at the risk of blurring the line between demonstratives and relative pronouns, perhaps even "I like THAT man" ).

Let's instead look at the title to a James Bond movie: The Spy who loved me. Here we definitely have a "subject" loving the object "me", and if we remove the "who" we end up with a simple, story-like statement about apparently only one spy (as opposed to from a potentially infinite number of spies in the "who" sentence). This is all clearly very different to "The spy (not the doctor!) (who/that) I loved...".

I have found that a very useful way to make students more or less HAVE TO use relative pronouns is in talking about actors:

A: Do you know David Warner?
B: No, what's he been in?
[A: He was the bad guy in Titanic.
B: You mean, he was the guy (that) Rose was going to marry/?who was going to marry Rose?]
A: He was the bad guy (in Titanic) who put the necklace into jack's pocket, and who later handcuffed Jack to the pipe!

Now, obviously David Warner has played more unique roles: if students were looking at a photo of him they might also realize that:

He was the theatre director in Scream 2.
He was the evil wizard in Time Bandits
etc.

The point is, that where there is (conceivably) more than one person with that role in the movie, the defining relative pronoun becomes useful, and we define the person according to the things they did (or that were done to them), in order to distinguish them from the group they are a part of.

Basically, we want an environment in which we (I or you), and the people we know, cannot enter and are thus not the main actors, not the main movers and shakers. Only then can the "other people" really become the grammatical subjects themselves! (See how the "bigger" role of Rose could well push the "bad guy" out of subject position, it is not just because women (can) choose to not accept a marriage proposal, but because she is the more major character, I think. "Construal"* is a very interesting area!).

Another example: Do you know Tom Sizemore? He was the astronaut who blew himself up in Red Planet. He was also the bank robber who grabbed the little girl (and who got shot by Pacino) in Heat. Oh, he was also the sergeant (I think) in Saving Private Ryan.

* "Construal: The process whereby a given state of affairs is structured by a language user for purposes of its linguistic expression. Typically, a state of affairs can be construed in alternate ways." From the Glossary in John R. Taylor's Cognitive Grammar (OUP 2002).

[fluffyhamster]

Oh, I forgot to add, there is one weakness with the "Talking about actors" activity: why does A mention the actor concerned in the first place? It is more usual to talk about the movies/plots themselves, I guess...unless we are simply trying to explain who was in it. I mean, most "good" actors are already so famous that it's hardly realistic that they won't be known, and the "eye candy" ones also have their less-discerning mass followings. So perhaps you'd need to have a bland "default" reason ("He/she's a good/an interesting actor, and not as well-known as he/she should be") or a jokey one ("He/she's really sexy - I want to marry him/her!").

[fluffyhamster]

A slightly less rambling answer here to your question, lucy!

There doesn't seem to be a discernible basis meaning-wise for choosing between each of the relative pronouns: when a conscious choice is made, it is mostly for reasons of formality or assumed "correctness" e.g. who/that vs. whom, especially as in "That's the guy (who/that) I was talking to" vs. "That's the man to whom I was talking" kind of thing.

I recall the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English saying that a desire to avoid the quagmire of correct usage was one reason for avoiding using relative pronouns altogether (i.e. for choosing the "zero relavitizer" and thus creating a "gap" where a pronoun could have gone).

Another reason they gave for omission when the pronoun is not the subject (i.e. an object!) is that the subject that does remain marks the beginning of the next clause so unambiguously that further grammaticalization/grammatical structure is unnecessary (that is, there is no need for more than one pronoun):

Subject: We got on the first bus that came.
Object: We got on the first bus (that) WE saw.

There is nothing remotely transformational or tricky about this, it is just basic meat and potatoes processing of words in linear sequence (make of the "missing object" after "WE saw." what you will!).

Finally, to not use a relative pronoun when it is the subject results in a non-sensical piling up of events, rather than an event followed by a defined/modified thing:

* We got on the first bus came. (=The first bus came, we got on it?!)

Hope this answers your questions more clearly.

The acceptable "bus" examples above are from John Eastwood's Oxford Guide to English Grammar. I find this is a very clear and unfailingly helpful book, similar in style and presentation (and also with a very thorough index) to Swan's Practial English Usage, but the advantage of Eastwood's book is that it is an actual grammar, not an A-Z reference (not that he can deal with everything in just one section! Cross-references abound also!).

[lucy black]

Thank you Stephen Jones and Fluffy Hamster

So we can drop the relative pronouns when there is a subject word after them.

Fluffy Hamster says we should use past tense examples to elicit examples with relative pronouns. I can't really explain why that is true either.

I suppose I should know all this

[metal56]

I wonder if I might ask a question

In the sentences

I think he is the man who did it or He is the man that I like

Why is it we can drop that, but not who?

Hello Lucy

I wonder if I might ask you an off-topic question? In another thread we are discussing distancing in language use. I noticed that you had used what is commonly known as a polite request form to open your post, and thread (above). What do you feel was the reason you used such a form?

I don't wish to put you on the spot or criticise your usage in any way, I was just curious.

Thanks.

Metal56

[fluffyhamster]

Fluffy Hamster says we should use past tense examples to elicit examples with relative pronouns. I can't really explain why that is true either.

I suppose I should know all this

Welllll, you can find and use "present" examples if you want, but I do feel that defining people by their actions (in contexts where they are - or more likely were - the main "actor") is the more typical use of the form, and what is more, shows an essential use of the form.

As I pointed out on the "The worst relative pronoun exercises you've ever seen..." thread, a lot of present examples can be reduced (e.g. by omitting the RP and verb before the present participle, or by use of pointing, deitic reference, prepositional phrases, reordering of words etc); that is, there is often something that is "adjectival "or "descriptive" enough in the sentence or context already, without the need for further describing/"defining" structures.

[lucy black]

Metal 56 wrote:

I wonder if I might ask you an off-topic question? In another thread we are discussing distancing in language use. I noticed that you had used what is commonly known as a polite request form to open your post, and thread (above). What do you feel was the reason you used such a form?

I'm afraid I haven't got the remotest idea.

[fluffyhamster]

I'm afraid I haven't got the remotest idea.

She's onto you, metal!