That or not That

Question

I often wonder why so many people use 'that' in a sentence when, more often than not, it is completely unnecessary. For instance: 1. The weather that the forecaster had promised never arrived in Wales! 2. The promise that I gave you was for 'unsettled' weather. (Note 'had' is also redundant in case 1.) - Is this bad grammar or written, in some cases, merely for effect.

Correct usage as I understand would be, say, at the beginning of a sentence. Such as; 3. That the weather being so bad, was not the fault of the forecaster.

Your third sentence is not regular English. The first two are. — Marq, Jan 31 '16 at 19:28
Possibly related: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/78/when-to-use-that-and-when-to-use-which — Marq, Jan 31 '16 at 19:29

score 1 · Answer 1 · answered Jan 31 '16 at 20:10

The answer to your first question, like almost all "why" questions, is "because that's how English is".

For more explication: in a relative clause one (but not both) of the subordinator "that" and a relative pronoun "which" "who" must be used; except that if the relativised noun phrase (the one to which the relative clause is attached) functions as the direct object of the verb in the relative clause, then they may both be omitted. Note the word "may": "that" or "who/which" may be used or not, at the speakers choice.

These are all relative clauses attached to a noun phrase, so cannot normally occur at the beginning of a sentence.

Your final example is a very different construction. As others have pointed out, it is ungrammatical as it stands; but if the subordinate clause is corrected to "that the weather was so bad", it will be grammatical; but it is not an instance of a relative clause, but a nominal clause, the subject of "was not the fault of the forecaster". For that construction, as you say, "that" is required if the clause begins a sentence, but is usually optional if the clause follows a verb and is its direct object.

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Jan 31 '16 at 19:32

/That the weather being so bad, was not the fault of the forecaster/ is agrammatical. Grammatical would be: That the weather was so bad, was not the forecaster's fault. Also: 1. The weather the forecaster had promised never arrived in Wales! [no need to put in the that] 2. The promise I gave you was for 'unsettled' weather. [no need for that]. English speakers know when to leave out implied thats.

That or not That

2 Answers2