Please help
Can any one explain why "that" in the sentence used for? Is it a noun clause, or relative clause?
(It was a feature peculiar to the colonial wars of North America, that the toils and dangers of the wilderness were to be encountered before the adverse hosts could meet.)
If it is possible, could you explain the "that" in the sentecence blow, too?
(I had thought of so many different ways of spending our money, that we did not know what to buy with it.)
class car 6371) Can any one explain
whywhat "that" in the sentence is used for? Is it a noun clause, or relative clause? Neither.It was a feature peculiar to the colonial wars of North America [no comma] that the toils and dangers of the wilderness were to be encountered before the adverse hosts could meet.
2) If it is possible, could you explain the "that" in the
sentecence blow,sentence below, too?I had thought of so many different ways of spending our money [no comma] that we did not know what to buy with it.
'that' is a complementizer in both sentences.
1) From 'that' to the end of the sentence is a content clause that tells what the feature is.
Compare: It is a well-known truth that pigs cannot fly.
From: (The fact) that pigs cannot fly is a well-known truth.
2) From 'that' to the end of the sentence is a content clause that is part of a "so ... that ..." construction.
Compare: Today I was so tired that I could not finish my work.
CJ
Comments
I think it's preferable to call clausal "that" a subordinator rather than a complementizer, since the content clauses that it introduces are not always complements -- they can also be adjuncts:
What has happened that you are looking so worried?
"This is my security pass" he said, holding it high that all might see it.
You must have been sitting awfully quietly, that he could could come in there and not notice you.
Admittedly, examples like those are not especially common, but they do lend weight to the argument that "that" is best analysed as a subordinator (functioning as a 'marker').
Does "complementizer" mean the same as "subordinator"?
No.
CJ