4 ms·

I fail to understand how is that different than let say... "I read an article which I didn't understand". Is it really that different than: "I read an articl

I fail to understand how is that different than let say... "I read an article which I didn't understand". Is it really that different than: "I read an article about English grammar, which article I didn't understand" ?

TylerE 3y ago
I have literally never heard the latter formulation from a native English speaker. It's very awkward phrasing.
fastaguy88 3y ago
A pedant might point out that "I read an article which I didn't understand" should be written "I read an article that I didn't understand" or "I read an article, which I didn't understand." In this case, the "which" case is appropriate, but the sentence needs a comma. In general, if there is no comma, you should be using "that", and if you are using "which", you need a comma.
drt5b7j 3y ago
How about "I read an article and I didn't understand it"? Why complex why simple is just as good ?
zarzavat 3y ago
For me the second one seems like it is asking a question. My brain wants to swap “I didn’t” into “didn’t I” and add a question mark to the end.
smitty1e 3y ago
This is sort of thing I might write: "I read something by Victor Davis Hanson today, which article I didn't understand". But I like retro phrasings for their own sake.
tikhonj 3y ago
If you say something like "I read an article about grammar, which I didn't understand", it's ambiguous whether "which" refers to "article" or "grammar". In this specific example it's pretty clear from context, but it could be a bit confusing with a different object ("I read an article about the new theory, which I didn't understand.") I'd just rephrase the whole sentence to avoid ambiguity if it were a problem because saying "which article" doesn't quite feel right in this context—a bit too formal and old-fashioned?—but this use of "which" seems like a reasonable way to disambiguate if it fits in context.
happytoexplain 3y ago
This was my thought. It's the restatement of the noun for specificity that's rare now, not the word "which". We drop the implicit noun just like we drop the imperative subject, i.e. we say "Close the door" now instead of "Close you the door".
- totetsu 3y ago
  Fly you, fools!
  - emmelaich 3y ago
    That comma, oof. Try it without. Or even "Fly, you fools!"
- icambron 3y ago
  That is what’s rare, but you’re missing something important: the reason the repeated noun is there to begin with is to avoid ambiguity about what, exactly, is being granted, since there are multiple available antecedents. The errors? No, the motion. In other words, the noun isn’t implicit, or at least not adequately implicit. Even in 1934, you didn’t think of it as eliding the noun when you used “which” as a pronoun; rather, you thought of using the noun again as an escape hatch for ugly situations like this. More to the point, in modern English, where we don’t have this option, we’d have to restructure the sentence to avoid this ambiguity, not simply drop the noun.
- mhdhn 3y ago
  "Close you the door" sounds completely ungrammatical to me. Is it or was it ever considered grammatical in modern English?
cvoss 3y ago
The difference is the restatement of the antecedent in the second example you give. You used "article" twice. Since "which" is a pronoun, it can stand in for the actual noun, as it does in your first example. But sometimes the noun is restated along with the pronoun. Here's another interesting example: "Which article didn't you understand?" In question form, the "ante"cedent of the pronoun would actually come long afterward, even from a different speaker, as the answer to the question. But to add clarity to the scope of the question, a noun summarizing the answer type ("article") accompanies the pronoun.
FabHK 3y ago
The meaning is clear and identical, but the grammatical function of the "which" is different in the two examples. In the first one ("... which I didn't understand"), "which" acts as a relative pronoun, referring and replacing the thing it refers to. In the second case, "which" acts as an adjective modifying the noun ("article"). That is the unusual usage. Note, for example, that we definitely don't do it with "who": "I saw a girl who was singing." "I saw a girl, who girl was singing."
- jcranmer 3y ago
  > In the second case, "which" acts as an adjective modifying the noun ("article"). That is the unusual usage. "Which" as an adjective is still relatively common. Consider, e.g., "Which one did you say you replaced?" It's the fact that it's being used as an adjective instead of a pronoun in this case that is unusual.
  - thaumasiotes 3y ago
    That's not an adjective. It's a determiner. (In your usage and in your parent comment's usage - the difference between the two of you is that your use is interrogative.) (Determiner is the part of speech to which the articles belong, but it also includes things like each, this, some, etc.)
    - bonzini 3y ago
      Determiners can also be used as either adjectives or pronouns.
      - thaumasiotes 3y ago
        Determiners can't be used as adjectives, ever. When applied to a noun, they fit into the determiner spot. There is no way to change that. "Determiners can be used as pronouns" isn't true either, though many of them can. See whether you think you can do it with every or a(n).
- andyferris 3y ago

TylerE 3y ago

I have literally never heard the latter formulation from a native English speaker. It's very awkward phrasing.

fastaguy88 3y ago

A pedant might point out that "I read an article which I didn't understand" should be written "I read an article that I didn't understand" or "I read an article, which I didn't understand." In this case, the "which" case is appropriate, but the sentence needs a comma. In general, if there is no comma, you should be using "that", and if you are using "which", you need a comma.

drt5b7j 3y ago

How about "I read an article and I didn't understand it"? Why complex why simple is just as good ?

zarzavat 3y ago

For me the second one seems like it is asking a question. My brain wants to swap “I didn’t” into “didn’t I” and add a question mark to the end.

smitty1e 3y ago

This is sort of thing I might write: "I read something by Victor Davis Hanson today, which article I didn't understand". But I like retro phrasings for their own sake.

tikhonj 3y ago

If you say something like "I read an article about grammar, which I didn't understand", it's ambiguous whether "which" refers to "article" or "grammar". In this specific example it's pretty clear from context, but it could be a bit confusing with a different object ("I read an article about the new theory, which I didn't understand.") I'd just rephrase the whole sentence to avoid ambiguity if it were a problem because saying "which article" doesn't quite feel right in this context—a bit too formal and old-fashioned?—but this use of "which" seems like a reasonable way to disambiguate if it fits in context.

happytoexplain 3y ago

This was my thought. It's the restatement of the noun for specificity that's rare now, not the word "which". We drop the implicit noun just like we drop the imperative subject, i.e. we say "Close the door" now instead of "Close you the door".

totetsu 3y ago
Fly you, fools!
- emmelaich 3y ago
  That comma, oof. Try it without. Or even "Fly, you fools!"
icambron 3y ago
That is what’s rare, but you’re missing something important: the reason the repeated noun is there to begin with is to avoid ambiguity about what, exactly, is being granted, since there are multiple available antecedents. The errors? No, the motion. In other words, the noun isn’t implicit, or at least not adequately implicit. Even in 1934, you didn’t think of it as eliding the noun when you used “which” as a pronoun; rather, you thought of using the noun again as an escape hatch for ugly situations like this. More to the point, in modern English, where we don’t have this option, we’d have to restructure the sentence to avoid this ambiguity, not simply drop the noun.
mhdhn 3y ago
"Close you the door" sounds completely ungrammatical to me. Is it or was it ever considered grammatical in modern English?

cvoss 3y ago

The difference is the restatement of the antecedent in the second example you give. You used "article" twice. Since "which" is a pronoun, it can stand in for the actual noun, as it does in your first example. But sometimes the noun is restated along with the pronoun. Here's another interesting example: "Which article didn't you understand?" In question form, the "ante"cedent of the pronoun would actually come long afterward, even from a different speaker, as the answer to the question. But to add clarity to the scope of the question, a noun summarizing the answer type ("article") accompanies the pronoun.

FabHK 3y ago

The meaning is clear and identical, but the grammatical function of the "which" is different in the two examples. In the first one ("... which I didn't understand"), "which" acts as a relative pronoun, referring and replacing the thing it refers to. In the second case, "which" acts as an adjective modifying the noun ("article"). That is the unusual usage. Note, for example, that we definitely don't do it with "who": "I saw a girl who was singing." "I saw a girl, who girl was singing."

jcranmer 3y ago
> In the second case, "which" acts as an adjective modifying the noun ("article"). That is the unusual usage. "Which" as an adjective is still relatively common. Consider, e.g., "Which one did you say you replaced?" It's the fact that it's being used as an adjective instead of a pronoun in this case that is unusual.
- thaumasiotes 3y ago
  That's not an adjective. It's a determiner. (In your usage and in your parent comment's usage - the difference between the two of you is that your use is interrogative.) (Determiner is the part of speech to which the articles belong, but it also includes things like each, this, some, etc.)
  - bonzini 3y ago
    Determiners can also be used as either adjectives or pronouns.
    - thaumasiotes 3y ago
      Determiners can't be used as adjectives, ever. When applied to a noun, they fit into the determiner spot. There is no way to change that. "Determiners can be used as pronouns" isn't true either, though many of them can. See whether you think you can do it with every or a(n).
andyferris 3y ago