Thread: Simple question I think

I'll make this short and sweet, I'm having trouble with wording, and which word to use - whether I should use WHO or THAT. Here it is:

'The figure WHO emerged from the darkness was my brother'

or

'The figure THAT emerged from the darkness was my brother'

Which is correct? Or are they both correct?

The second one I suppose. Using that shows the uncertainty about who the figure was. So you may want to say "The figure that emerged from the darkness turned out to be my brother." If that is what you are saying. Using "who" doesn't sound correct to me.

I try to discipline myself to use "who" when referring to a person, and "that" when referring to an object. Here, you're somewhat reducing the brother to an object. Is there any reason you couldn't simply say "my brother emerged from the darkness?"

Originally Posted by rane

I try to discipline myself to use "who" when referring to a person, and "that" when referring to an object. Here, you're somewhat reducing the brother to an object. Is there any reason you couldn't simply say "my brother emerged from the darkness?"

Yes, or just say "the figure turned out to be my brother", leave "that" out of it.

I agree with the comments from both Robdemanc and rane here. I'm no expert but "who" does not read well and I believe is incorrect. "That" works or you could take the route rane suggests which I think works better. Sometimes, I get the usage of "that" and "which" confused.

Originally Posted by Gardening Girl

I agree with the comments from both Robdemanc and rane here. I'm no expert but "who" does not read well and I believe is incorrect. "That" works or you could take the route rane suggests which I think works better. Sometimes, I get the usage of "that" and "which" confused.

"That" and "Which" are problems for me too, so I try to not use them if I can help it.

That's a great suggestion too Robdemanc to leave out the word "that". Anyway, you have a few ideas here Ritcherd.

I think it's hard not to use "that" and "which". How do you manage that? I struggle occasionally with them but I find that since you can't always avoid them, it's best to attempt the correct usage. It's all great practice and practice makes perfect!

Originally Posted by Gardening Girl

That's a great suggestion too Robdemanc to leave out the word "that". Anyway, you have a few ideas here Ritcherd.

I think it's hard not to use "that" and "which". How do you manage that? I struggle occasionally with them but I find that since you can't always avoid them, it's best to attempt the correct usage. It's all great practice and practice makes perfect!

"That" and "which" are also tricky. I try to use "that" when singling out an object on its own.

For example: "The car in the parking lot had been vandalized." This, I believe, is correct when talking about the only car in a parking lot.

If we said "The car, which was in the parking lot, had been vandalized," we leave open the possibility that more than one car had been parked there.

Thanks rane. Great advice.

Originally Posted by rane

"That" and "which" are also tricky. I try to use "that" when singling out an object on its own.

For example: "The car in the parking lot had been vandalized." This, I believe, is correct when talking about the only car in a parking lot.

If we said "The car, which was in the parking lot, had been vandalized," we leave open the possibility that more than one car had been parked there.

"The car, which was in the parking lot, had been vandalised." - To me this sounds like you are indicating where the car was and may or may not relate to the fact it was vandalised and yes, there may or may not be other cars there.

"The car in the parking lot, that had been vandalised, ..." - To me this sounds like you are emphasing the particular car that had been vandalised, as oposed to other cars in the parking lot so this implies there are other cars in the parking lot.

"The car, which had been vandalised, was in the parking lot." This sounds like you are reffering to the car and where it is, and not necessarily the fact it had been vandalised.

To get out of it I suppose i would say: "The car had been vandalised; it sat in the parking lot..."

Rane has the best answer - my brother emerged from the darkness. You might say it's 'Right as Rane'.

Edit - To clear up the who, that, which confusion, consult Fowler and all will be made clear.

Easy to get round:


'A figure emerged from the darkness, it was my brother'

Or:


'The figure which emerged from the darkness was my brother'

I was taught to use who for people and that/which for objects. In your example, "figure" means something similar to "shape." You are talking about the figure OF a person -- not about a person himself, so you would use "that."

As far as that/which goes, it depends whether you need to disambiguate or not.
"The figure that emerged from the shadows" tells me which figure you are talking about. It clarifies.
"The figure, which emerged from the shadows," tells me more information about the figure, but assumes I already know what figure you are talking about. It does not clarify, just elaborates.






-----

Also,

Originally Posted by Bloggsworth

Easy to get round:
'A figure emerged from the darkness, it was my brother'

Comma Splice!

Thanks for all the advice everyone

I think WHO is probably more correct in that instance, but you could use THAT too, couldn't you? It might be that you want to give the figure a certain amount of anonymity so that it is viewed more as an object than as a person.

Also, as to WHICH or THAT, I tend to go by whether I want a comma there or not. Probably not the best or most correct way to do it, though. Example:

The figure, WHICH emerged from the darkness...

The figure THAT emerged from the darkness...

I think THAT is more restrictive of the subject, or something like that.