Oct 23, 2005 11:10
18 yrs ago
English term
the meeting, which / the meeting that
Not for points
English
Other
Law (general)
Could someone tell me which sentence is accurate:
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting, WHICH they did not attend.
Or
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting THAT they did not attend.
Or may we leave out 'which' or 'that' here?
I.e. would the following be correct:
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting they did not attend.
My concern lies with Fowler's distinction between the use of 'that' and 'which' as a relative conjunction introducing an identifying and a non-identifying clause (preceded by a comma) respectively?
It seems to me that 'that', and not 'which', is appropriate here.
Thanks for any suggestions, preferably backed-up by 'solid' evidence.
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting, WHICH they did not attend.
Or
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting THAT they did not attend.
Or may we leave out 'which' or 'that' here?
I.e. would the following be correct:
...before or after the shareholder’s meeting they did not attend.
My concern lies with Fowler's distinction between the use of 'that' and 'which' as a relative conjunction introducing an identifying and a non-identifying clause (preceded by a comma) respectively?
It seems to me that 'that', and not 'which', is appropriate here.
Thanks for any suggestions, preferably backed-up by 'solid' evidence.
Responses
| 3 +3 | which |
Armorel Young
|
| 4 +2 | shareholders' meeting |
Derek Gill Franßen
|
Responses
+3
30 mins
Selected
which
I'm assuming that there is only one possible shareholders meeting which could be being referred to - "which they did not attend" is therefore not being used to define which meeting is being spoken of and it is correct to say "...the meeting, which they did not attend".
If on the other hand there were several meeetings and you need to define which one is meant, you would use that (and no comma).
To give further examples:
They did not know of the decision because it was taken at the special meeting, which they did not attend. (Only one special meeting).
They did not know of the decision because it was taken at the meeting that they did not attend. (Various meetings took place, of which one was "the meeting that they did not attend.)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 37 mins (2005-10-23 11:48:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
You can apply the dictum here which I think is Fowler's: "Use that to tell which and which to tell that".
If on the other hand there were several meeetings and you need to define which one is meant, you would use that (and no comma).
To give further examples:
They did not know of the decision because it was taken at the special meeting, which they did not attend. (Only one special meeting).
They did not know of the decision because it was taken at the meeting that they did not attend. (Various meetings took place, of which one was "the meeting that they did not attend.)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 37 mins (2005-10-23 11:48:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
You can apply the dictum here which I think is Fowler's: "Use that to tell which and which to tell that".
+2
42 mins
Derek Gill Franßen
Germany
Germany
Native in English
&
English
Specializes in field
Germany
German Attorney & University Lecturer
Native in: English
Works in: German to English, English, English to German, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
55
English term (edited):
shareholder's meeting
shareholders' meeting
I know that it wasn't asked, and I'm going to leave the substantiated explaining of "which" and "that" to my esteemed colleagues, but I think it should read "shareholders' meeting" unless there is only one shareholder (unlikely). The question isn't for points, so... ;-)
As far as the actual question goes, my FEELING is that there should be a comma after "meeting" in either case, i.e. in the constructions with "which" and "that" - both of which would be fine (to tell you the truth, I'd base my decision on feeling, which I think may take into account things like repetition, flow and the sounds of the sentence in my ear.
The third sentence would also work (IMHO). :-)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 45 mins (2005-10-23 11:56:10 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Oops, I'm sorry - I left out the last ")" and it should have read "...sound of the sentence...". ;-)
As far as the actual question goes, my FEELING is that there should be a comma after "meeting" in either case, i.e. in the constructions with "which" and "that" - both of which would be fine (to tell you the truth, I'd base my decision on feeling, which I think may take into account things like repetition, flow and the sounds of the sentence in my ear.
The third sentence would also work (IMHO). :-)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 45 mins (2005-10-23 11:56:10 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Oops, I'm sorry - I left out the last ")" and it should have read "...sound of the sentence...". ;-)
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Armorel Young
: yes, it must be a shareholders' meeting
25 mins
|
| agree |
Richard Benham
: ...unless one shareholder is holding a very private meeting. Which/that, for me, is a question of feeling, but there is no option about commas: without for defining, with for giving additional information.
3 hrs
|
Something went wrong...