Grammar question -we need Wafflycat back!

[Unkraut]

I was amused to hear a chap from the BNP on You and Yours earlier, say something was "indicatative" instead of indicative. Oh, the purity of the man, can't even speak English...

Yes, but someone speaking on behalf of the Banco Nacional de Panamá could not be expected to be a native speaker of English...

 

[monnet]

It's all about clauses and relative pronouns.

In a defining clause (ie: one not wrapped in commas, where the information is essential to understanding the sentence), as in the case here, Noel was free to chose his relative pronoun. In more formal prose it would be advised to stick to the specific pronoun. If the subject and object were different he could have omitted the pronoun altogether.

Were the line to contain a non-defining clause (ie: on which contains additional information about the subject) he would have to chose the correct pronoun for the subject.

ie: Maybe, you're the one that's gonna save me
or Maybe, you're the one who's gonna save me.

Maybe, you're the one who/that I'll save
Maybe, you're the one I'll save

Maybe, that girl, who is wearing pink, is gonna save me. (no option for 'that')

 

[monnet]

This might be the difference between US and British English. I am supposed to translate German into US English! GRRRRH!

In the absence of a comma, the Americans use that whereas the British use which: The data which you just deleted (us) is The data that you just deleted (them). If there is a comma, then which is use in both English variants: The data, which you just deleted, cannot be retrieved.

There's an element of this, too. The use of 'that' is not on its own US English but where British English uses both forms, US English tends to restrict itself to 'that' in defining clauses.

 

[yenrod]

Did Oasis get it wrong? Should-

"Maybe, you're gonna be the one that saves me"

have been

"Maybe, you're gonna be the one who saves me"?

They are from Manchester, so I doubt they got it right...

MANC. ACCENT:

'eh kidder - you avin a laff...ar kid ?

 

[Auntie Helen]

... I am supposed to translate German into US English!

Part of my job is translating US English into British English. But I've never before spotted that 'which/that' thing you just detailed. So either I automatically corrected it when rewriting, or I completely missed it

I seem to spend my life removing commas from before 'and' when turning text into British English. "This recipe requires potatoes, milk, and butter."

 

[Unkraut]

Part of my job is translating US English into British English. But I've never before spotted that 'which/that' thing you just detailed. So either I automatically corrected it when rewriting, or I completely missed it

I seem to spend my life removing commas from before 'and' when turning text into British English. "This recipe requires potatoes, milk, and butter."

Great minds think alike ......

Glad I spotted this before it disappeared into old threadland. I hate putting commas in unnecessarily, especially in lists, bullet points, and other occasions. Another variant is: With this function you can delete the records ..... which you are supposed to render With this function, you can delete the records .....

 

[swee'pea99]

Stuff wafflycat, you want a definitive answer? Ok...

He could be right. You couldn't say he's definitely wrong. Because he could be saying:

You are the one (entity in this world) that

which would be fine. It remains the case, however, that what he is in his grisly Mancunian way attempting to convey is

You are the one (person) that

in which case, 'that' is wrong, and he ought to have said 'who'.

Neither is 'wrong', since a human being has a dual status: they are a thing, and also a person. But 'who' would generally be considered 'more correct', given that we more often talk of people as people than as things. Especially if we consider them so important to us as to constitute our wonderwall. Ar-right?