THAT

[maestrowork]

This one nips me all the time: When to use "that" and when not to?

[HConn]

Every third word I write is "that."

My rule: If it makes sense without it, leave it out.

:\

[ChunkyC]

That's about it. I fight with that there word all the time.

[underthecity]

I'll usually remove a lot of my "that"s while I'm editing. As it turns out I didn't need them in the first place.

I get confused about "that which." I can never figure out when to use it.

utc

[ElizabethJames]

Well then. That's that.

L

PS We've never met a that we liked, though we've used some under duress.

[Greenwolf103]

This is my peeve word. Really. I try at all costs to avoid ending my sentences with "that." It just doesn't seem appropriate.

What really bugs me, though, is when people use it twice when a perfectly reworded sentence could do the job better.

But, in some cases, "that" is called for, such as with the comment "I heard that" or "That which doesn't kill us...."

[Azura Skye]

HConn wrote:
My rule: If it makes sense without it, leave it out.


That's been my rule of thumb lately. It works too.:)

[mr mistook]

I like "This".

[ElizabethJames]

Then of course there's . . .

When in doubt, leave it out.

[macalicious731]

My rule: If it makes sense without it, leave it out.


Exactly. It's one of my pet peeves, actually, to see it strewn about all the time. I usually think of it as just extra wording. Of course, it's all over my own WIP, but I'll massacre them all in time.

[Gala]

Here's one quick example that will be useful*:

"I think that it's time to go."
Better: "I think it's time to go."
(even better: "It's time to go" or "Let's go" or "leave/run/go".)

"I think that" is overused in English speaking and writing, same as "I just want to say that..."


*"that" needed to make the sentence understood.
-----------
"I hoped that we'd have time..." that unnecessary
but:
"That's necessary" that necessary.

[sc211]

That's that for that.

[mistri]

I hate that. I tend to leave it out where possible, but someone I work with (above me) insists on putting it in wherever possible.

Is there a definitive rule about this anywhere?

[three seven]

There seem to be so many inoffensive words being beaten to death around here that we're all going to have to start writing in another language.
I can't remember ever having been upset by the word 'that' in general use, although there is one circumstance in which its use should lead to cruel and unusual punishment: Anyone caught writing 'That dress', 'That video' or 'That acceptance speech' must be taken outside and shot.

[Writing Again]

Editors do get upset about that word that. It is a perfectly good word, but so many writers use in it that sloppy way -- and never use that when which is the correct choice.

[maestrowork]

Can some one just give me a few examples when it's necessary and grammatically correct to use "that" and when it's niether unnecessary or grammatically incorrect to use it?

[detante]

From The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=that)


that Pronunciation Key (tht, tht)
pron. pl. those (thz) . . .

Usage Note: The standard rule requires that that should be used only to introduce a restrictive (or defining) relative clause, which identifies the entity being talked about; in this use it should never be preceded by a comma. Thus, in the sentence The house that Jack built has been torn down, the clause that Jack built is a restrictive clause identifying the specific house that was torn down. Similarly, in I am looking for a book that is easy to read, the restrictive clause that is easy to read tells what kind of book is desired. A related rule stipulates that which should be used with nonrestrictive (or nondefining) clauses, which give additional information about an entity that has already been identified in the context; in this use, which is always preceded by a comma. Thus, we say The students in Chemistry 101 have been complaining about the textbook, which (not that) is hard to follow. The clause which is hard to follow is nonrestrictive in that it does not indicate which text is being complained about; even if the clause were omitted, we would know that the phrase the textbook refers to the text in Chemistry 101. ·Some grammarians extend the rule and insist that, just as that should be used only in restrictive clauses, which should be used only in nonrestrictive clauses. Thus, they suggest that we should avoid sentences such as I need a book which will tell me all about city gardening, where the restrictive clause which will tell me all about city gardening indicates which sort of book is needed. But this extension of the rule is far from universally accepted, and the use of which with restrictive clauses is common. Furthermore, since that cannot be used with clauses introduced by a preposition (whether or not restrictive), which is used with both clauses when such a clause is joined by and or or to another that does not begin with a preposition, as in It is a philosophy in which the common man may find solace and which many have found reason to praise. Such constructions are often considered cumbersome, however, and it may be best to recast the sentence completely to avoid the problem. ·That is often omitted in a relative clause when the subject of the clause is different from the word that the clause refers to. Thus, we may say either the book that I was reading or the book I was reading. In addition, that is commonly omitted before other kinds of subordinate clauses, as in I think we should try again where that would precede we. These constructions omitting that are entirely idiomatic, even in more formal contexts. See Usage Note at doubt (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=doubt). See Usage Note at this (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=this). See Usage Note at whatever (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=whatever). See Usage Note at which (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=which). See Usage Note at who (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=who).