On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Sure, I'm not arguing with trying to be formal. The grammatical rule
>> that you're describing doesn't exist for me, though. I believe that
>> "that" can only introduce a restrictive clause, whereas "which" can
>> introduce either a descriptive or a restrictive clause.
>
> Yeah, as was noted downthread, that's the British view of it.
Even in the Midwest I have frequently heard people arguing to avoid
"that" in most situations where either could work. I ran into one
professor who went to what I considered silly lengths to expurgate
the word from documents.
> Anyway, we've probably beaten this horse to death.
Just to be sure of that, I'll cite the Chicago Manual of Style (my
preferred style guide), which seems to chart a course somewhere in
the middle:
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Whichvs.That.html
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
