Please can someone give me an idiot's guide to the use of WHICH or THAT

[FreckledLeopard]

I'm a pedant. I'm a lawyer for crying out loud. Yet I do not understand when to use that and when to use which. I've just looked at a load of grammar sites and am still none the wiser.

Please please put me out of my misery (without referring to restrictive or non-restrictive clauses)!

[FreckledLeopard]

Like most of my legal drafting

[missorinoco]

As far as I can recall which relates to people and that to inanimate objects. Or at least that's what the spelling and grammar application does to my work.

[somebloke123]

Euphemia Surely the difference in meaning that you refer to is effected by the use of commas in your second example, not by the use of "which" rather than "that"?

It seems to me that you can always substitute "that" for "which" in phrases such as "The sausages which/that I bought for supper".

But obviously not when it's used interrogatively - "Which ones do you mean?"

[FreckledLeopard]

Commas aside, there is definitely a difference between which and that and they cannot be used interchangeably. But how one tells, I don't know.

Bump....

[NotMostPeople]

I've no idea but "the sausages which I bought for supper" doesn't sound right to me.

Isn't which always a question?

[somebloke123]

I'd agree it sounds a bit clunky ("the sausages I bought" sounds better) but I think it's correct.

No I don't think it's always a question. In "the painting which was hanging in the hall" there's no question implied. I think "which" here is a relative pronoun.

[SunshineOutdoors]

I thought if you used which it always had to be preceded by a comma and if you're not using a comma then it's that, so you couldn't say 'the painting which was in the hall...' or 'the painting, that was in the hall....'

[SunshineOutdoors]

I've always thought you use them how Euphemia explained.

[Chickpeas2]

Have always struggled with this too...found link below, seemed to make sense while I was reading it...!

Guardian link

[somebloke123]

Hmm - I completely see the distinction in meanings explained by Euphemia but I still think it's the commas that do it. I think in the first example you could replace "that" with "which" and it would keep the same meaning but admittedly might not sound quite as good.

However, an interesting comment from the book "Grammar and Style" by Michael Dummet (page 86) tends somewhat towards Euphemia's view:

"When the relative clause is essential to determine the reference ..... that is preferable to which and often to who: the hat that I bought yesterday is usually better than the hat which I bought yesterday. This principle is not sacrosanct however; for instance, if there are already two occurrences of that in the sentence, which should be preferred."

[anneriordan]

someone once explained it to me as follows:

"Please pass me the fourth book on the shelf, which is green" - you fetch the fourth book along, which happens to be green (and also happens to be boring, heavy, whatever)

"Please pass me the fourth book on the shelf that is green" - you count along the green books only, so you might end up with the 5th, 6th, nth book on the shelf, if that's the fourth green bood.

"That" means the qualifier is essential. In the case above it would be simpler to say "pass me the fourth green book" but a lot of other characteristics are harder to turn into adjectives, hence "that".

I think that's the same as euphemia's version. You don't always need commas to separate the "which" bit but it helps to indicate that it's incidental (or parenthetical).

[bigbadbarry]

I'm a scientific copy editor, which means we do have some unusual and old-fashioned rules, but I would never use which without a comma. That shouldn't need one. That gives you specific information about something; which adds extra information that is not necessary to the sense. You should be able to remove the which-containing clause and have the sentence still make sense.

[fuzzpig]

[bigbadbarry]

To go back to your painting example, to me the painting that was hanging in the hall means not the one that was in the kitchen. The painting, which was hanging in the hall, ios just giving some extra info about where it had been.

[missorinoco]

Intersting. I think I understand it now, although the phrase parathentical clause made me shudder to realise how much I have forgotten/never knew.

[Snazzynewyear]

'Which' introduces 'extra' information, that you could take out and the still understand the meaning of the sentence. 'That' leads to essential info, e.g. the painting that was in the hall - you need to know it was that specific painting as there are others you might confuse it with. If in doubt it's likely that 'that' is what you need. Which gets overused as (I think) people think it sounds slightly more formal and therefore is somehow better.

However if what you're writing is not likely to be ambiguous, then I wouldn't worry about it too much. And I say that as someone who has taught grammar in their time.

[NotTreadingGrapes]

The defining and non-defining relative clause thingy