TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Just Which From:Carter Hansen <chansen -at- CWIS -dot- UNOMAHA -dot- EDU> Date:Tue, 20 Dec 1994 15:42:03 GMT
shall -at- hilco -dot- com writes:
> >
> > Yeah, I follow this rule. An easy way to go on a "which hunt" is to
> > watch for the comma: "which" follows a comma.
> >
> That's not always true, is it? Can you cite a reference for this rule?
> As usage continues to do away with more and more commas, I see a lot of
> "whichs" that aren't preceded by commas.
When "which" is used to introduce a restrictive relative clause, no comma
should precede it.<Example: "I can only give you that which I don't need."
Although this is acceptable usage, some strict grammarians insist that which
be used only in non-restrictive relative clauses. They contend that only
"that" should be used to introduce restrictive relative clauses.
- Carter Hansen (CARTERCH -at- AOL -dot- COM ;) :) ;) :) :-) :-P)
