Forums · General English Grammar & Vocabulary, Listening & Speaking · General English Grammar Questions
"Relative clauses need to be distinguished from a 2nd type of finite clause which can postmodify a noun: the appositive clause. This looks very similar to a relative clause introduced by that . Compare:
1) The story that I wrote was published.
2) The story that I had resigned was published.
The first is relative (that can be replaced by which); the 2nd is appositive (that means "that is", and cannot be replaced by which)."
I read the whole thing several times and I still don't understand what it is talking about. I still feel the two sentences are pretty much the same. What really is appositive clause?? Could anyone offer a better elaboration??? Thanks a million!
Here “the story” is the object of “I wrote”. In other words, “I wrote” is an incomplete sentence.
2) The story that I had resigned was published.=The story was published.(What kind of story is it?) The story is that I had resigned.
Here “I had resigned” is a complete sentence and it is the content of the story.
belief (believe), comment (comment), confidence (confident), discovery (discover), doubt (doubt), evidence (evident), fact, fear (fear), hope (hope), indication (indicate), idea, information (inform), knowledge (know), news, opinion, order (order), problem, promise (promise), proof (prove), proposal (propose), report (report), rumor (rumor), story (tell), suggestion (suggest), thought (think), truth (true), wish (wish).
(EX) We must face the fact that the Earth is steadily warming.
(EX) We agree to the opinion that we must reduce CO2 release.
(EX) Columbus had a firm belief that the world is round.
(EX) Cleopatra received the news that Caesar had been killed.
Please note the undelined parts can stand as a complete sentence by themselves.
Anonymous:1) The story (that I wrote) was published. --> Here, "that" is a relative pronoun referring to "the story," and it is the object of the verb "wrote." This sentence can be divided into two: The story was published. I wrote the story. ("the story" becomes "that" or "which" when this sentence becomes a suborniate clause to the main clause "The story was published.")
2)The story that (I had resigned) was published.--> Here, "that" is not the object of the verb "had resigned." In other words, we cannot say, "I had resigned the story." The sentence also can be divided into two: The story was published. I had resigned. (In the latter sentence, "the story" is not included.)
I hope this helps.
It's not likely the people who participated in this thread at the that time are still waiting for an answer. They might not even be visiting this forum anymore.
Anonymous:You are right, BUT there are still many others who are very glad for this explanation.
AnonymousIf that is not the object of had resigned, what is it? The subject of the relative clause is I, so that can't be the subject. In the grammar I am accustomed to that is definitely an object in this sentence. Whether resign is the right verb is another question.
Anonymous:yes for instance ı have newly discovered this forum and found a solution to my confusion by these answers thank you all
People are waiting to help.
Live chatRegistered users can join here
Related forum topics:
Clauses?Clause?Adjectival Clauses?non-restrictive clauses?Subordinate Clauses?Relative Clauses?Appositive Phrase?Clauses in this sentence?Appositive (gerund) or participle phrase in...Will in If Clause?Finite subordniate clauses?Comparative ClausesAnalyzing subordinate clauses?Relative clauses that act as nouns?Ing Clauses?