Shelton
Help! Restrictive and Non—Restrictive attributive clauses! which one is correct and nature? 1 I hate those companies that emit pollutants 2 I hate those companies which emit pollutants 3 I hate those companies, which emit pollutants 4 I hate those companies who emit pollutants 5 I like to go to places where there have natural scenery. 6 I like to go to places, where can borden my horizons. 7 I like to go to places that have natural scenery. 8 I like to go to places which have natural scenery.
Nov 1, 2019 1:44 AM
Answers · 7
Not a teacher or professional, but a native speaker. Here's my input: 1 I hate those companies that emit pollutants (the most natural sounding one) 2 I hate those companies which emit pollutants (probably okay, but 1 is better) 3 I hate those companies, which emit pollutants (incorrect) 4 I hate those companies who emit pollutants (probably okay, but 1 is better) 5 I like to go to places where there have natural scenery. (incorrect - you could say "I like to go to places where there is natural scenery" or "I like to go to places that have natural scenery") 6 I like to go to places, where can borden my horizons. (incorrect - you could say "I like to go to places where I can broaden my horizons) 7 I like to go to places that have natural scenery. (sounds fine) 8 I like to go to places which have natural scenery. (fine, but 7 is better).
November 1, 2019
First of all, you need to understand that the issue of restrictive/non-restrictive clauses is irrelevant here. This is because your examples are ALL examples of restrictive clauses. The relative clauses in your sentences define the noun in question and cannot be removed from the sentence. Simply adding a comma does not turn a restrictive clause into a non-restrictive one! Non-restrictive clauses are independent from the core structure of the sentence. This means that they can be added or removed without affecting the meaning or altering the overall grammatical structure of the sentence. For example: "Iceland, which has some beautiful natural scenery, is an increasingly popular holiday destination." If you remove the clause "which has some beautiful natural scenery", the structure and meaning of the sentence is unaffected. The sentence is saying "Iceland is an increasingly popular holiday destination" both with and without clause about the scenery. The non-restrictive clause merely adds extra information: it is not essential for either the grammar or the basic meaning of the sentence. Now for your sentences: 1, 2 and 4 are fine. You can use either 'that' or 'which' in a defining relative clause, and you can also use 'who' to refer to a company. 3 is wrong because the comma should not be there. 7 and 8 are fine. They have the same meaning. 5 and 6 are wrong because they are not properly worded. Here are some suggested corrections: 5. I like to go to places where there is natural scenery. 6. I like to go to places where I can broaden my horizons. Note that that 6 is a restrictive clause, so there should be no comma. I hope that's clearer now.
November 1, 2019
I think 1,2,4 and 5,7,8 are right but I confuse about that/which
November 1, 2019
Do you think that scenery is countable?
November 1, 2019
What do you think? Give your choices and teachers will correct your answers and explain as needed.
November 1, 2019
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!
Shelton
Language Skills
Chinese (Mandarin), English
Learning Language
English