+0
I'm helping a friend with English-it's not her native language. But, I don't know why this is the the case.
The original sentence:
1. "Here are some beverages (that) you might think help your diet, but don't." Here, "that" is optional.
2. "Here are some beverages that help your diet, but don't." If you remove "you might think", a "that" is required.
What is the difference between the two sentences that makes "that" optional/required?
1 2 3 4 5 6
Comments  
The second version makes no sense. They do but they don't?

The object of the first sentence is to make a contrast between what you think and what is true.
You might think you're smart, but you're not.
If you take away the "you might think," we have, "You're smart but you're not."

Okay, that's not your question. Let's take away the "but don't," so it makes some sense.

Here is something you think helps you.

Here is something that helps you.
Here is something helps you. (doesn't work!)

As you can see, there is no difference.
"That" is the subject of the clause.
When you substitute "you think," the "that" becomes understood.
Without the "you think," the "that" is not understood. Go figure.
Hi,

In sentence #2, that is the subject of the subclause (relative clause). In #1, however, it is not. If the object pronoun of a sentence is the subject of the relative clause that follows, we cannot leave the relative pronoun out. In all other cases, though, it is perfectly okay. It usually makes your sentence sound more casual/informal.

More examples:

Optional that

- The car (that) I saw was beautiful.
- These are the vegetables (that) I like.

Obligatory that

- Can I get you a drink that will make you feel better?
- This is the guy that helped me out.

Kind regards,

Dokterjokkebrok
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
dokterjokkebrok. If the object pronoun of a sentence is the subject of the relative clause that follows, we cannot leave the relative pronoun out.
Hi, dokter,
I'm not sure I understand how the expression "you might think" relieves "that" of its responsibilities as subject of the clause.

1. "Here are some beverages (that) you might think help your diet, but don't."

2. "Here are some beverages that help your diet, but don't."

If you leave "that" in place in sentence 1., it seems to be the subject of the clause, "help" being the verb.
If you remove it, does "think" now become the verb instead of "help"? Is "you" now the subject?

Best wishes, - A.
AvangiI'm not sure I understand how the expression "you might think" relieves "that" of its responsibilities as subject of the clause.
Excellent point -- probably because I was also going to make it. Emotion: smile

CJ
charlie494that help your diet, but don't.
This anomaly has already been pointed out above. You need a better example. Just leaving out "but don't" should give you what you want, but you can do even better than that.

This is a cure that is effective.

This is a cure (that) you might think is effective.
This is a cure (that) doctors discovered recently.

"that" is required when it is the subject of the clause which immediately follows it.
It is not required in other situations, for example, when it is the subject of another clause which is subordinate to the clause which immediately follows or when it is not a subject of any clause.

This is a cure. It (= the cure) is effective. [subject of the main clause of the relativized construction]

This is a cure. You might think [(that) it (=the cure) is effective.] [subordinate to "you might think"].
This is a cure. Doctors discovered it (=the cure) recently. [not the subject of any clause]

CJ
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
AvangiIf the object pronoun of a sentence is the subject of the relative clause that follows, we cannot leave the relative pronoun out.
If 'that' is the subject of the relative clause, it is not omissible.
Avangi
I'm not sure I understand how the expression "you might think" relieves "that" of its responsibilities as subject of the clause.

1. "Here are some beverages (that) you might think help your diet, but don't."

This is an example of the relativised element ('R') being located within a content clause embedded inside the relative clause. If I gap the 'R' element, you'll see what I mean:

"Here are some beverages [(that) you might think __help your diet, but don't]

As you can see, 'R' is the subject of 'help' and the 'help your diet' clause is a content clause functioning as the complement of 'think'. "You might think R help your diet". In other words, some beverages that might help your diet are being proffered and those are the beverages that the whole NP refers to. Note that the R element is the subject not of the relative clause itself but of the content clause embedded within it.

Hope that helps.

BillJ

Thanks, Bill. I quoted the rule from Dr. J for reference, but it seems clear enough. I suspected it might be misapplied in the OP's example. I'm a bit tired to absorb the 'R' and the gaps, but I'll hit it tomorrow. [Y]

- A.
Hi,
AvangiI'm not sure I understand how the expression "you might think" relieves "that" of its responsibilities as subject of the clause.
You're absolutely right Avangi. My mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. [Y]

Best,

Jordy
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more