I consider myself to be a reasonably articulate person, but no matter how I look at it, I don’t see a fundamental difference in meaning between “that” and “which”. Can someone give me a text example that (or which?) would clearly illustrate how the use of one or the other would change the meaning of the text?
From The Elements of Style, Third Edition:
“That” is the defining, or restrictive, pronoun. “Which” is the nondefining, or nonrestrictive, pronoun.
The lawn mower that is broken is in the garage. (Identifies the lawn mower - Which lawn mower? The lawn mower that is broken.).
The lawn mower, which is broken, is in the garage. (Merely gives an additional fact about the only lawn mower in question).
FTR, I was trained as a journalist, so my answers may vary from someone whose expertise comes from an English degree.
My understanding of “that” vs. “which” is simple: “that” is used for essential clauses in referring to aninanimate object or animal without a name (people and animals with names are covered by “who” and “whom”); “which” is used for nonessential clauses.
According to the AP stylebook, you should only break this rule when “that” has already been used earlier in the same sentence, e.g., “He said Wednesday that the part of the army which suffered severe casualities needs reinforcement.”
Furthermore, here are some examples where only one of the two words will work, not either/or:
“Which dress should I wear?”
“Which of you want to come with me?”
“That post of yours was quite funny.”
“This tequila or that red wine?”
Also, according to Merriam-Webster, “which” can be used only as a pronoun or adjective; “that” can be used as both of those, as well as a conjunction or adverb.
An independent clause, separated from the main clause of the sentence, takes “which.” Otherwise, use that.
Thus:
Can someone give me a text example that would clearly illustrate how the use of one or the other would change the meaning of the text?
And:
The preceding text example, which clearly illustrates the rules of grammar that apply in this instance, should be useful to you.
The previous posters have mentioned the restrictive/non-restrictive distinction, and BigStar303 give a good example.
BUT (and there’s always a but in grammar), it’s not a hard-and-fast rule. The Mavens have this to say:
They also mention that in is more common in Britain to use “which” in a restrictive clause.
Hi, Jadis.
According to most U.S. style guides, you should use “that” for essential clauses and “which” for non-essential clauses. By “essential” I mean “essential for the reader to understand the sentence”. You can omit non-essential clauses and still have a working sentence. (The “official” term for essential clauses is “restrictive”, which I find very non-intuitive. I find “essential” to be much more understandable. Same thing for “non-restrictive” vs. “non-essential”.)
Some examples:
[ul][li]The car that I want is out of my price range. (The phrase “that I want” is essential to this sentence: The audience wouldn’t know which car the speaker is talking about without it.)[/li][li]The green car, which I want, is out of my price range. (The phrase “which I want” is not essential to this sentence: The audience already knows which car the speaker is talking about. If you omit that phrase, the audience will still know which car the speaker is talking about.)[/li][li]The experiment that was carried out at MIT was unsuccessful. (The phrase “that was carried out at MIT” is essential in that it provides key meaning: It indicates that only the experiment that from MIT was unsuccessful; other experiments were not necessarily unsuccessful.)[/li][li]The experiment, which was carried out at MIT, was unsuccessful. (The phrase “which was carried out at MIT” is not essential to this sentence. It provides some extra info, but the reader will still know what the speaker is talking about it if the phrase is omitted.)[/li][/ul]
Some of my favorite references where you can read more about this:
[ul][li]Woe Is I by Patricia T. O’Conner, Grosset/Putnam[/li][li]Lapsing into a Comma by Bill Walsh, Contemporary Books[/li][li]The Well-Tempered Sentence by Karen Elizabeth Gordon, Ticknor & Fields[/li][/ul]
IIRC, in U.K. English it is acceptable to use “which” for non-essential clauses. All of my style guides are U.S. versions, though, so I can’t confirm that.
HTH!
Jeyen
Is this really a General Question?
(Defined as one that (or which) can not be answered by a quick search of the archives)
The subject has been discussed before in at least these threads:
“which” v “that”
MS Word Grammar question
The conclusion is always the same:
- use ‘that’ (or ‘which’) without comma in non-restrictive clauses
- use ‘which’ with comma in restrictive clauses
The subject has been viewed from most angles, and I suggest we drop this thread right away, and promise not to discuss the subject again. (At least until someone has new information that has not been brought forwards in previous discussions, which would indeed be very interesting!)
The Australian Style Manual says ‘that’ can only be used with defining clauses and ‘which’ may be used with either a defining clause or a non-defining clause.
That info original enough for you tc? :rolleyes: I can see you are going to be a charming addition to the board with your debonair wit. You planning to drop into every thread and demonstrate your mastery of the search engine and to instruct us all to drop threads if you find positive results?
Thank you tc! I knew this had just been discussed but I was having trouble finding the thread during the peak hours yesterday. I guess I wouldn’t say it as explicitly as “let’s drop it” but we are told to search and not pursue questions which have been covered.