+0
Is there a way to say that a thing has a certain quality?

Compare:
1) She is the girl whose bike was stolen.
2) That is a bike which (??) wheel is bent.

The actual sentence I had problems with was:
* In 1999 168 ships that were registered to people from the European Union sailed under so-called ‘flags of convenience’, which countries do not control fishing activities at all.

Is this sentence correct? If not, isn't there a better sollution for this than replacing "countries" by the wordy "belong to countries that"? Or am I just putting to much information in one sentence?

Thank you.
+0
Hello

I'm also an English learner, and so I am not sure about my answers. But please allow me to try
2) That is a bike which (??) wheel is bent.

I would say either:
That is a bike the wheel of which is bent.
That is a bike whose wheel is bent.
In 1999, 168 ships that were registered to people from the European Union sailed under so-called ‘flags of convenience’, which countries do not control fishing activities at all.

I am not quite sure about what you want to mean by this sentence. Do you mean like this(?):

In 1999, 168 ships registered by people from the European Union sailed under so-called 'flags of convenience' to countries where fishing activities are not controlled at all.

I'm sorry I cannot help you much. Please wait our teachers to come.

paco
+0
"whose" is OK with an inanimate.

"That is a bike whose wheel is bent."

Also, as mentioned above, "That is a bike the wheel of which is bent".

More idiomatically, "That's a bike with a bent wheel".
Even better, "That bike has a bent wheel".

The problem sentence you quoted was a problem for me, too.

"In 1999 ... 'flags of convenience', whose countries do not control ..." would be my choice, if I had to choose between "which" and "whose".

Even better would be to rephrase with something like "... 'flags of convenience', that is, (under) flags of countries which do not control ...".

CJ
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Comments  
Thank you, both.

I knew that you couldn't use 'who' for inanimates, so I thought that wasn't possible either.

I think CJ understood my sentence best and I think your sollutions are quite good. Although your second paraphrase is a bit too long (as I have to watch the number of words), I do wonder if it is really 'that is' when I omit 'under'. Alternatively, shouldn't it be 'those are' as you are referring to a number of flags -- on the other hand, it is a certain type of flags and it may very well be an expression... Please explain.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
The "that" is "that is" does not refer to the flags, but to the entire idea which precedes. "that is" is short for "that is to say" or "in other words". Sometimes the Latin abbreviation for "id est" ("that is")( i.e.) is used instead. I would avoid "i.e." in most cases, however, purely for stylistic reasons.

"... ships that were registered to people from the European Union sailed under so-called ‘flags of convenience’, [that is / that is to say / in other words / i.e.], flags of countries that do not control fishing activities at all.

CJ