Talk:Kennel club

From Academic Kids

Sorry--I have to point out that 'which'->'that' is arbitray; is there a particular Wiki usage preference operating here? Quill 03:12, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, I have to point out that which/that is not arbitrary ;-). Which is used for nonrestrictive clauses; that for restrictive clauses. Another way to say it is that a nonrestrictive clause provides extra info about something that is not necessary to identify the thing; restrictive clauses help to identify the thing. ("My hat, which is blue, is my favorite." (I have only one hat. You don't need to know its color to identify it.) "The hat that is blue is the least expensive of the ones for sale". (There are a bunch of hats and you need more info to know which is which.)) Refs: Chicago section 5.36; Strunk and White "That vs. Which". Unless it's arbitrary in, say, British English, in which case I'd definitely change it to match this style, if in the other case it doesn't matter. But most British stuff I've read follows the same usage. Elf | Talk 19:22, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Now, now! Let me be more specific ;) You and I know enough to know that usage of 'that' vs. 'which' varies enough and has enough associated rules as to enable the erudite to make an argument for just about any usage. In the sentences in question, there is enough evidence of usage by writers of good repute to make the choice of 'which' or 'that' in these clauses a matter of personal preference rather than a hard-and-fast rule.

However, I know perfectly well that it is of no use arguing with what we used to call the 'dead grammarians' and many of us stubbornly follow Messrs. Strunk and White despite all logic or evidence of modern use (not a dig at you; I've been known to do it myself). For the record, though, from Merriam Webster's Collegiate, 10th ed.: "usage That, which: Although some handbooks say otherwise, that and which are both regularly used to introduce restrictive clauses in edited prose. Which is also used to introduce nonrestrictive clauses..."

No, no, be antagonistic, we all know that edit wars are the point of wikipedia anyway.

...OK, not really. So what does ol' Merriam know anyway? It also says there's such a word as irregardless!  ;-) Now, if it were *Noah*-- OK, a lot of people use which and that interchangably (obviously). It looks wrong to me. So if it's interchangeable to you and wrong to me and Mssrs S & W, then it still won't matter if I change it. Am I right, or what? Elf | Talk 03:06, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Really, Madam! No, now really! Allow that '...a lot of educated people use that and which interchangably' (at least in this instance) and I'll happily call a truce!

'Irregardless'?! Nay, not so! You sent me scurrying to the book first thing this morning--really--grammar on an empty stomach--it's not to be borne! Now let's have the complete truth--it's stated clearly that 'irregardless' is an incorrect word, and one is to use 'regardless' instead.

You're quite correct on this point: if the use is interchangable it does not matter which one is used, which is why you should have left it alone and why (you will notice) I did not change it back (big of me, wasn't it?). In all seriousness, my only motive in questioning was to find out why the edit had been made, as it looked fine to me.

By the by, a wikipedian who shall remain nameless (but whose initials read like a fairy-creature) let 'pre-existing condition' pass in another article, which I suppose is an 'existing condition' to the Wikipedian gramatically-challenged.

Just for my own edification--do you follow the School of the Dead Grammarians on everything? Messrs. S&W have gotten me into more than one argument, so I'm just wondering how you manage...? I remember a particularly nasty incident where a boss insisted that I change 'composed of' to 'comprised of'--insisted, mind you--and I could not have been more right. I swore that one day I'd be in a position where no one would be able to do that to me again....but I'm over it now...no, really, I'm fine...I am....

Quill 22:49, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Discussion continued on User talk:Quill. Elf | Talk 01:19, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)