0

Which one is correct?

He was so angry that didn't let me talk to him.

or

He was so angry who didn't let me talk to him.

I believe that the first sentence is correct, because before "that" we have "angry", not a human. Is that correct?

If using "who" is incorrect, please answer the question below.

If we break the above sentence into 2 sentences, that/who replaces "he" that is human. what happens now? shouldn't i use "who" instead of "that"?

He was so angry.
He didn't let me talk to him.

Just to remind, i know the pronoun "that" can also be used for human. I just want to make sure if using "who" is possible or not.

Barmar
  • 20,741
  • 1
  • 38
  • 59
amin
  • 117
  • Hello amin - Could you use capital letters where appropriate please? (E.g. at the beginning of sentences and for the pronoun "I", etc.) Many thanks. – chasly - supports Monica Jul 19 '15 at 23:33
  • 1
    possible duplicate of How to use "who" vs. "that" – ScotM Jul 20 '15 at 19:06
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's predicated on a misconception. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 20 '15 at 22:17
  • To be clear, I didn't VTC (vote to close) because of lack of research but because I believe the duplicate question that ScotM found, answers this question quite well. – Mari-Lou A Jul 21 '15 at 10:31
  • @Mari-Lou A . my question isn't duplicate. i know where to use "that" or "who". i had problem in this specific sentence and if you read the answers, you'll find out the reason i was confused and it has nothing to do with using "that" or "who". – amin Jul 22 '15 at 16:11
  • I know how to use... I'm sorry, but the examples you wrote are ungrammatical. You need to precede the auxiliary verb with the subject. He didn't. Read the answers in the duplicate question, they might help you. If they don't, and you can explain why, I'll vote to reopen your question. – Mari-Lou A Jul 22 '15 at 16:46
  • However the other three users who voted to put this question on hold, sustain that you haven't shared your research, which you haven't. Your post is based on your ideas of what is correct, but they're a little unclear and hazy. 6 upvotes for this comment http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/260880/which-one-is-correct-who-or-that-in-this-adjective-clause?noredirect=1#comment572523_260882 – Mari-Lou A Jul 22 '15 at 16:51

3 Answers3

3

If that and who were used as relative pronouns, you would be correct: that would be used as the restrictive relative pronoun for things, and who for humans, but those sentences require that as a conjunction.

  • He was so angry that he didn't let me talk to him.

In the sentences below that and who are used as relative pronouns.

  • Katrina was the storm that destroyed New Orleans.
  • He was the soldier who didn't let me talk to my brother.
Mari-Lou A
  • 91,183
Zan700
  • 3,376
1

1. Neither is correct.

2. Of the two, the second is preferable because it uses 'who'.

3. You say,

I believe that the first sentence is correct, because before "that" we have "angry", not a human. Is that correct?

Well, "angry" is not a thing. It is an adjective that relates to "he" (a person).

4.

He was so angry who didn't let me talk to him.

The above sentence is just about understandable in English but it is certainly not idiomatic.

I would be tempted to write it thus:

He was so angry - the one who didn't let me talk to him,.

chasly - supports Monica
  • 37,215
  • why aren't they correct? you mean that i can't relate these two sentences (He was so angry. He didn't let me talk to him) to show the cause of not letting me talk to him? – amin Jul 19 '15 at 23:52
  • If you want to show cause, you can say: "He didn't let me talk to him because he was so angry" or "Because he was so angry, he didn't let me talk to him." – chasly - supports Monica Jul 19 '15 at 23:58
  • really thank u. another question. can i use adjective clause while having adjective before adjective clause? – amin Jul 19 '15 at 23:59
  • 6
    There's absolutely nothing wrong with "He was so angry that he didn't let me talk to him," but you have to have the second 'he'. I'm sure this belongs on ELL, though – Au101 Jul 20 '15 at 00:00
  • @amin You're welcome. I think it would be best to make a new question. Comments are used to discuss the original subject. – chasly - supports Monica Jul 20 '15 at 00:01
  • @Au101 - Oh, good point (+1). It didn't occur to me that simply repeating the pronoun would fix it. I think that is worth giving as an answer. – chasly - supports Monica Jul 20 '15 at 00:03
  • @Au101 - if we add second "he", then we don't have adjective clause anymore.is it correct? because we didn't replace "that/who" with "he". – amin Jul 20 '15 at 00:09
  • @Au101 - also it means that adjective clause is used to modify noun while i am making this sentence to modify adjective, so it is impossible. is what i am saying correct? – amin Jul 20 '15 at 00:22
  • I think you have misunderstood how this construction works. Neither of the options you give in your question are grammatical in English. The construction goes like this: "He was so angry that [complete, independent clause]". You must have the whole clause. "He was so angry that he didn't let me talk to him/he threw a book at me/he shouted at me". I don't really understand what it is you want in your answer to this question and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to give it to you if I knew, since it's been a long time since I did this. – Au101 Jul 20 '15 at 00:29
  • I hope you can find your answer, but I think you may have to phrase your question more clearly. I'm no longer certain it belongs on ELL, but it's very hard to know what you want and to give it to you. You may wish to read about this structure again and then come back with more precisely defined questions if you have them – Au101 Jul 20 '15 at 00:31
  • thanks a lot. i think i found the answer. i just read somewhere that the job of adjective clauses is to modify the noun phrases that they follow. i think i am modifying the adjective that is incorrect, so i should change my sentence to what u said earlier.anyway i try to search more to find the real answer. – amin Jul 20 '15 at 00:41
0

Adjective clauses give more information about nouns. In your sentences they are trying to modify an adjective "angry," and here it doesn't work. Change the first one thus: "He was so angry that he didn't allow me to talk to him," or "His anger was such that he didn't allow me to speak to him." For the second example, "He is the angry man who didn't allow me to speak to him." This is a restrictive relative clause. Notice in the "who" sentence "who" refers to "man" and allows us to join the two sentences together to restrict "man."

Look on the Internet under "Adjective clauses" or "relative clauses," and study some of the example sentences; this will give you a better feel for the subject and all of the different ways this kind of sentence can be constructed.

In the above sentence, you can omit "that" and simply use "he," "He was so angry he didn't allow me to speak with him."

If you are able to, find a copy of Grammar Form and Function by Milada Broukal, book 3B. This has a good section on adjective clauses. It is written in a clear way--I use it as a reference. The book is published by MCGraw Hill. Also, Business Grammar by Michael Duckworth is worth checking out.

michael_timofeev
  • 7,162
  • thanks a lot. it is a relief. because if u read my comments, i finally found the answer, exactly like what u r saying, but i wasn't sure. – amin Jul 20 '15 at 01:04
  • Amin, I edited my answer to give you some resources to check. You should also compare your native language with English to see the differences. I teach Chinese students and Chinese handles this sort of thing in a different way than English causing Chinese students all sorts of trouble. – michael_timofeev Jul 20 '15 at 01:10
  • exactly true. i was trying to bring my native language structure into english :D which is absolutely wrong. – amin Jul 20 '15 at 01:33