I hate "that"...and other grammar problems!

kristie911 · Sep 13, 2005

I am doing a line by line edit on my novel and I never realized I write just like I speak and I say "that" way, way too much.

i.e. I never realized that I don't speak as well as I thought I did.
Or the one I just went back and deleted in "I never realized that I write just like I speak."

It's a superfluous word that I can't seem to shake. I see it when I edit but why am I putting it there in the first place?! It seems like I've deleted about a hundred of them! I don't know if it's some sort of strange Midwestern speech thing...I guess it's better than "Like".

Oh well, I guess I should be glad, being surrounded by rednecks, I haven't started saying things like: She don't see them anymore now.

Yes, I actually work with people that talk like that. It drives me bonkers!

BTW, I'm overstocked in "that"s, and will be auctioning them off for a nickel apiece on ebay if anyone needs some. lol

reph · Sep 13, 2005

"Yes, I actually work with people that talk like that."

It should be "people who talk like that," because they're people. Are any of the thats you're deleting whos in disguise?

Not every that is superfluous, even aside from the "who" kind.

kristie911 · Sep 14, 2005

See what I mean?! I totally missed that one...

Of course, it was late and the moon was in my eyes!

What can I say? I have no excuse...

KTC · Sep 14, 2005

I do a FIND in WORD for THAT all the time. It's amazing how fast they fly off the fingers when you are typing. I am constantly doing a THAT delete. It's my nemesis. I'm glad others have this problem too!

cwfgal · Sep 14, 2005

KTC said:
I do a FIND in WORD for THAT all the time. It's amazing how fast they fly off the fingers when you are typing. I am constantly doing a THAT delete. It's my nemesis. I'm glad others have this problem too!

Ditto.

Beth

StoryG27 · Sep 14, 2005

Mmm, me too.
Maybe we should all get together and start an, 'I hate THAT' club.

Mistook · Sep 14, 2005

reph said:
"Yes, I actually work with people that talk like that."

It should be "people who talk like that," because they're people. Are any of the thats you're deleting whos in disguise?

I've got to say, this is an old pet peeve of mine for song lyrics. "The one that I love" must be a line in about three thousand songs. I always think, "You must not love her as much as you think, seeing as how you refer to her as an object rather than a person."

Click to expand...

Nateskate · Sep 14, 2005

I was so brutal in deleting "That" my editor was putting some back in. Now, I'm putting some back in.

It's an overused word, but it has a place here and there.

Jamesaritchie · Sep 14, 2005

That

Mistook said:
reph said:

"Yes, I actually work with people that talk like that."

It should be "people who talk like that," because they're people. Are any of the thats you're deleting whos in disguise?

I've got to say, this is an old pet peeve of mine for song lyrics. "The one that I love" must be a line in about three thousand songs. I always think, "You must not love her as much as you think, seeing as how you refer to her as an object rather than a person."

Click to expand...

Actually, I think fiction writers can, with care, learn something from such song lyrics. Sometimes grammar or word choice is wrong in song lyrics because the writer didn't know any better, but more often than not the writer was sacrificing grammar or word choice for rhythm, cadence, and sound.

"The one who I love" is grammatically incorrect, and "The one whom I love," while correct, just doesn't have either the rhythm or the sound needed.

Sometimes, just rarely, the right choice is the wrong choice, and the wrong choice is the right choice.

Click to expand...

loquax · Sep 14, 2005

What's wrong with "The one I love"?

reph · Sep 14, 2005

"This is dedicated to the one I love."

Honor thy Mamas and thy Papas.

(Oh, phooey. Now I'll have to pay the permissions fee.)

Jamesaritchie · Sep 14, 2005

One

loquax said:
What's wrong with "The one I love"?

In most lyrics, it doesn't scan. The Mamas and Papas line works only because of the entire sentence. Scansion matters, particularly in songs and poems. Correct grammar is usually best, but when faced with correct that doesn't sound right, or that doesn't scan, and with incorrect that does sound right, that scans, go with incorrect. This can be true in fiction, as well.

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Sep 15, 2005

"

I was taught that, as regards people, there is a time to use "who" and a time to use "that."

"Johnny Bravo is the one that I love" - Because the clause "that I love" is necessary to the sentence (a restrictive clause), we use "that."

"Johnny Bravo, whom I love dearly, just sent his Mama a lovely present." - Because the clause "whom I love dearly" is a parenthetical aside (a non-restrictive clause), we use "who."

With things, there is a similar distinction in when you use "that" and "which".

"This is the knife that killed Col. Mustard."
"This knife, which killed Col. Mustard, is in grave need of sharpening."

That's what I was taught in school, anyway.

Strunk & White do not seem to address it exept by inference here (page down a bit).

triceretops · Sep 15, 2005

Isn't the "that" word the one editors say, "oh hell leave it in there for me to take out."? I hate that that is the way things are supposed to be! Now there's a doozy for ya.

Tri

NeuroFizz · Sep 15, 2005

reph said:
"Yes, I actually work with people that talk like that."

It should be "people who talk like that," because they're people. Are any of the thats you're deleting whos in disguise?

Not every that is superfluous, even aside from the "who" kind.

Good call, Reph. This is one of my pet irks. A person is a who, not a that. Now, how about Nicole's example? I'm not sure, but to say a person is the "one" that I love--does that make it okay to use "that" since the word refers to one instead of the person (directly)? I need an expanded ruling on this.

Now, back to the original thread question/comment. Don't automatically throw away incorrect, obscure or repetitive words. They can be used. Each one of our characters should be very distinctive in his/her speech pattern as well as in his/her actions. Throwing in an annoying use of a word like "that" may mark a peculiarity of one of your characters, to give that character separation from your other characters, particuarly if their dialogue lines tend to come out sounding very similar. Little personal quirks in spoken grammar and usage help tag a speaker without using an overt tag, and gives the character greater depth, if done right. We do this without thought if two characters are from different backgrounds, but if two characters are close in background and interests, it can be a problem, and subtle quirks can help. My opinion, of course.

loquax · Sep 15, 2005

In England we have a radio station that constantly plays the same songs, and the idiots at my work have it on all day. One song they keep playing is "the one I love" by David Gray.

Another song they keep playing is "Cool" by Gwen Stefani. One line irritates me beyond belief - "And it's such a miracle that you and me are still good friends."

There's no excuse for it. The correct grammar would sound exactly the same. As you say, sometimes it fits, sometimes the songwriter just doesn't know any better.

NeuroFizz · Sep 15, 2005

Hi, L.

Just to be you-know-who's advocate, do you expect SnoopDog to use pinky-in-the-air, proper King's English? Music is cultural, and ethnic. Just like writing. Sometimes wrong is right in particular circumstances. Then again, I agree with you. Some songs are inconsistent in terms of grammar, which suggests the irregular usage is not for effect.

loquax · Sep 15, 2005

Neurofizz, you've hit upon quite a controversial subject.

Should language be respected? Or are we free to abuse it under the guise of "culture"?

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Sep 15, 2005

NeuroFizz said:
Good call, Reph. This is one of my pet irks. A person is a who, not a that. Now, how about Nicole's example? I'm not sure, but to say a person is the "one" that I love--does that make it okay to use "that" since the word refers to one instead of the person (directly)? I need an expanded ruling on this.

As I understand it, "that" versus "who" has absolutely nothing to do with "personhood". If my example is correct, then it's more relevent to say "A person is a who, not a which." Who/that is used with people, while which/that is used with things.

...which only addresses the issue of proper grammar in and of itself, and not the issue of whether every character in your novel, or every lyric in every song, ought to use proper grammar.

NeuroFizz · Sep 15, 2005

loquax said:
Neurofizz, you've hit upon quite a controversial subject.

Should language be respected? Or are we free to abuse it under the guise of "culture"?

...or are we free to let language evolve (or devolve some might say)? Again, I'm playing "advocate." Shall we commit to a practice of linguistic eugenics? If the function of language is to communicate, and we insist on proper language in communication in the business, educational and professional worlds, should we also insist on such rigid communication in the artistic worlds, where we can draw so heavily on the emotion and history of our particular lineages? Somewhere in this world, we need a place or places, where people can celebrate their particular roots without being made to feel improper or less than acceptable. Music has always been one of these places. Storytelling, another. I guess the question boils down to, which language should we respect, and which should we not respect?

Ray Dillon · Sep 15, 2005

Ah, "that." I might be doing that, too.

I just found out that I've been using "then" in place of "than" quite a bit. Not because I don't know the difference, but just not catching it.

I think I've worked that out, but it was pretty embarassing, so I'm paranoid about someone pointing something else like that out.

I'll be on the lookout for "that."

Good topic!

Jamesaritchie · Sep 15, 2005

That

NicoleJLeBoeuf said:
I was taught that, as regards people, there is a time to use "who" and a time to use "that."

"Johnny Bravo is the one that I love" - Because the clause "that I love" is necessary to the sentence (a restrictive clause), we use "that."

"Johnny Bravo, whom I love dearly, just sent his Mama a lovely present." - Because the clause "whom I love dearly" is a parenthetical aside (a non-restrictive clause), we use "who."

With things, there is a similar distinction in when you use "that" and "which".

"This is the knife that killed Col. Mustard."
"This knife, which killed Col. Mustard, is in grave need of sharpening."

That's what I was taught in school, anyway.

Strunk & White do not seem to address it exept by inference here (page down a bit).

The link you give isn't to Strunk & White. The Bartleby site only has the Strunk version that dates back to, I think, 1918.

There are times when "that" can be used, but it depends on the reference. "That" is for animals and objects when referring directing to an animal or object, and "who" is for people when referring directly to people. Which doesn't mean you can't write "Why is that man naked?"

Though in the case of the sentence you write, I wouldn't use "that" at all. Any sentence that reads as well, or better, without "that" is one where "that" should be dropped. "Johnny Bravo is the one I love" sounds much better to my ear.

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Sep 15, 2005

Jamesaritchie said:
The link you give isn't to Strunk & White. The Bartleby site only has the Strunk version that dates back to, I think, 1918.

I am corrected.

If I find an online reference to the rule I was taught, I'll post it.

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Sep 15, 2005

And here it is.

I find it interesting that although this article is very clear on "that" versus "which" for inanimate objects, it simply says that for people, " 'who' may be used for either kind of clause."

Eeeenteresting.

There's this, too.

Looks like I was misremembering my grammar lessons. "That" (restrictive)/"which" (non-restrictive) for inanimate objects, and "who" for people regardless of type of clause. OK, I can live with that.

Mistook · Sep 15, 2005

I'm looking at my dictionary, and there are six seperate entries for "That". It can be a noun, adverb, conjuction, adjective, and pronoun. No wonder it comes up so much in a person's writing:

Adverb:<I'm that tired I can hardly walk>

Conjunction:
<he made it clear that he did not agree>
<oh, that the world could be persuaded of the truth of that maxim -- W.S.Gilbert>
<not that it matters, but the shirts aren't back from the laundry yet>

Adjective:
<that gentleness ... as I was wont to have -- Shakespeare>
<those two are that way about each other>

Pronoun:
<that is a maple>
<read to the end of the chapter, and after that he went to bed>
<wily and destructive -- that's foxes for you>
<treated with the same respect that others are>

Noun: <civilization, they agree, faces an inexorable alternative, either this or that; but their thises are irreconcilable and even their thats are not the same -- Saturday Review>

I hate "that"...and other grammar problems!

Happy to be here

Fig of authority

Happy to be here

Stand in the Place Where You Live

On the rocks

Miss Behave

Neverending WIP

I verb nouns adverbly

Fig of authority

a work in progress

The grad students did it

I verb nouns adverbly

The grad students did it

I verb nouns adverbly

a work in progress

The grad students did it

Artist & Writer

a work in progress

a work in progress

Neverending WIP