Search results for 'tag:Commas tag:Whom' matching tags 'Commas' and 'Whom'

Re: which vs of which

Cool Breeze — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:33:33 GMT

Hi N2G

I'll butt in if I may. 1. He'd only left her a note on the bedside table of which she had not understood the content. There is a noun in the relative clause and that explains of in this case. I would reword the sentence: He'd only left her a note the content of which she had not understood on the bedside table. Since which has no possessive form, the of-genitive must be used unless we say: whose content.

New2grammar
Does it mean everytime two sentences are combined, an additional preposition will appear? If not, we're back to square one.Wrong conclusion.

This morning, I was awakened by a little girl knocking at the door ~~[of]~~ whom I'd never seen in my life. She told me she was my daughter while my wife was standing next to me. No need for a possessive form in this relative clause.

A dog came running toward me with a toy in its mouth, ~~[of]~~ which it had my name on it. Bad sentence, wrong comma usage. Better: A dog came running toward me. It had a toy with my name on it in its mouth.

If [of] required?

Re: How to find the robber

Avangi — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:22:23 GMT

Sounds good.

Commas after "hair," first sentence, second paragraph; and after "blood" in last paragraph.

"ask the person who they think is the robber" - Sorry, my ear says "whom," but I always get messed up about whether it's really the subject of the clause. Someone else should please comment. thanks.

Re: Word Formation - ?

Mister Micawber — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:42:28 GMT

.
You are too enamoured of the comma and use more words than necessary; both weaknesses slow down your message.

People interested in advertising as a career are also often interested in marketing and rightly so: the two are closely linked.

When asked what marketing is, the reply is often that it is connected with selling. This is true, but marketing is more than selling: it is deciding what will likely sell and to whom, getting it designed, manufactured, priced and packaged, promoting it, and then selling it. Marketing is a broader concept than advertising or selling. This must be fully understood by an advertising agency, who may need to explain to a client that its marketing policy is faulty and that unless the name, price or distribution of the product is changed, the advertising campaign will be useless.

Marketing is very important to any business venture. It is risky to create a product, no matter how technologically marvelous, and then simply hope that people will buy it. It is more sensible to find out first if a market exists for a proposed product or if there are gaps in an existing market. Thatâs where marketing comes in.

Re: please correct my answers

Anonymous — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:19:31 GMT

These are wrong (some just need commas):

NSW University is an open university, where everyone is welcomed.
We need a leader whom we can count on.
Donât trust anyone who is a stranger.
The room was filled with flowers which were given for Jen.
Mr. Peterson, whom we met last night, is a famous lawyer.

correct?

Re: please correct my answers

Mister Micawber — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 06:34:57 GMT

.
These are wrong (some just need commas):

NSW University is an open university where everyone is welcomed.
We need a leader whom has a unique character.
Donât trust anyone who you have just met.
The room was filled with flowers which were ordered by Jen.
Mr. Peterson, whom lives in our neighborhood, is a famous lawyer.

Re: which/that/who

Newguest — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:45:41 GMT

Anonymous

4. Two men whom I had never seen before came into the office is fine with or without commas before whom and after before. No, you can not use that because that is for inanimate objects (anything not a person). Always use who and whom when referring to people.

I also think that the last sentence is a non-restrictive relative clause, and we don't use "that" in such clauses.

take care

Re: which/that/who

Newguest — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:01:09 GMT

Kooyeen

1 - I don't think you can use "what", and for some reason I don't like "which". Also, I think that "everything" should be written separately, "every thing".
2 - You can leave it out. I don't know if it's used as a relative pronoun or a conjunction, though.
3 - With the comma "which" is ok, but not "that". If you use "that" without the comma, you get a restrictive relative clause that refers to the jackets and specifies what kinds of jackets those were: jackets that didn't fit him.
4 - If you use the commas you need to add "who". With no commas you can leave it out.

EDIT: I hadn't seen CB's post. I just read it and I think I don't agree on this:

3. The sentence is fine with that provided you leave out the comma and Martin tried on at least four jackets in all. If you use a comma, only which is possible and in that case Martin tried on a total of three jackets, none of which fitted him.

4. Your sentence with commas is wrong. If only two men came into the office and you had seen neither one before, write:

Two men, who/whom I had never seen before, came into the office.

If more than two men came and you hadn't seen two of them before, write:

Two men [who/whom/that] I had never seen before came into the office

I don't think the number of jackets or men is important when considering relative clauses.

I think this would be impossible to distinguish the difference when speaking not writing.

If I said: Two men who I had never seen before came into the office, who would know if I used the comma or not and how to interpret it?

So in your opinion Kooyeen I can write: Two men I had never seen before came into the office.

Re: which/that/who

Anonymous — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:58:29 GMT

1. Everything that happed was my fault. No, which is never correct. It's just the lazy ones that ignore the rules that will tell you it's okay. What is also wrong. (And ignore the suggestion that everything should be two words.)

2. Omit "that" it's useless there.

3. Martin tried on three jackets that didn't fit him. Your way is not wrong, but it's not preferred.

4. Two men whom I had never seen before came into the office is fine with or without commas before whom and after before. No, you can not use that because that is for inanimate objects (anything not a person). Always use who and whom when referring to people.

Re: which/that/who

Kooyeen — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:35:12 GMT

Newguest
1. Everything that happened was my fault. Can I also say: Everything what/which happened was my fault.
2. The last time (that) I saw her, she looked fine. Is the word "that" the object of this sentence so we can omit it?
3. Martin tried on three jackets, which didn't fit him. Can I also write:..that didn't fit him. Do you think it is a non-restricitive relative clause?
4. Two men, I had never seen before, came into the office. Is it also OK to write: Two man, whom/who/th

1 - I don't think you can use "what", and for some reason I don't like "which". Also, I think that "everything" should be written separately, "every thing".
2 - You can leave it out. I don't know if it's used as a relative pronoun or a conjunction, though.
3 - With the comma "which" is ok, but not "that". If you use "that" without the comma, you get a restrictive relative clause that refers to the jackets and specifies what kinds of jackets those were: jackets that didn't fit him.
4 - If you use the commas you need to add "who". With no commas you can leave it out.

EDIT: I hadn't seen CB's post. I just read it and I think I don't agree on this:

3. The sentence is fine with that provided you leave out the comma and Martin tried on at least four jackets in all. If you use a comma, only which is possible and in that case Martin tried on a total of three jackets, none of which fitted him.
4. Your sentence with commas is wrong. If only two men came into the office and you had seen neither one before, write:
Two men, who/whom I had never seen before, came into the office.
If more than two men came and you hadn't seen two of them before, write:
Two men [who/whom/that] I had never seen before came into the office

I don't think the number of jackets or men is important when considering relative clauses.

Re: which/that/who

Cool Breeze — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:33:01 GMT

1. Everything that is preferred by most grammarians. Which is sometimes used; what is incorrect.

2. That can be omitted.

3. The sentence is fine with that provided you leave out the comma and Martin tried on at least four jackets in all. If you use a comma, only which is possible and in that case Martin tried on a total of three jackets, none of which fitted him.

4. Your sentence with commas is wrong. If only two men came into the office and you had seen neither one before, write:

Two men, who/whom I had never seen before, came into the office.

If more than two men came and you hadn't seen two of them before, write:

Two men [who/whom/that] I had never seen before came into the office.