| 词组 | that |
| 释义 | that 1. "That," "which" introducing restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses. That is our oldest relative pronoun. According to McKnight 1928 that was prevalent in early Middle English, which began to be used as a relative pronoun in the 14th century, and who and whom in the 15th. That was used not only to introduce restrictive clauses, but also nonrestrictive ones: • Fleance his son, that keeps him company —Shakespeare, Macbeth, 1606 By the early 17th century, which and that were being used pretty much interchangeably. Evans 1957 quotes this passage from the Authorized (King James) Version (1611) of the Bible: • Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. During the later 17th century, Evans tells us, that fell into disuse, at least in literary English. It went into such an eclipse that its reappearance in the early 18th century was noticed and satirized by Joseph Addison in The Spectator (30 May 1711) in a piece entitled "Humble Petition of Who and Which against the upstart Jack Sprat That" That had returned, and although it could still be used to introduce a nonrestrictive clause, • Age, that lessens the enjoyment of life, increases our desire of living —Oliver Goldsmith (quoted in Lurie 1927) this function was much reduced. Its nonrestrictive function continued to diminish, and although it was still so used in 19th-century literature, by the early 20th century such use seemed anomalous enough that Fowler 1907 singled out these examples (and others) for censure: • And with my own little stock of money besides, that Mrs. Hoggarty's card-parties had lessened by a good five-and-twenty shillings, I calculated ... — Thackeray • How to keep the proper balance between these two testy old wranglers, that rarely pull the right way together, is as much ... —George Meredith • As to dictionaries of the present day, that swell every few years by the thousand items, the presence of a word in one of them shows merely ... —Richard Grant White The brothers Fowler may have been prompted to find nonrestrictive that anomalous by the opinions some grammarians expressed around the turn of the century. Hall 1917 cited several of these, who seem to have felt that nonrestrictive that had always been rare or had become so lately. Hall thought the grammarians had not looked very hard at English literature; he did, and listed some 115 authors who used nonrestrictive that (in some 1100 passages). About half of his authors are from the 19th century. Hall made one important point that no one else seems to: poets are the heaviest users of non-restrictive that. The reason is fairly obvious: that flourishes in unstressed positions where which will not fit comfortably. Grammarians and usage commentators tend to look at prose. It may well be that the historical tendency of that to be less often used in introducing nonrestrictive clauses has always been more marked in prose than in poetry and speech. At any rate, Virginia McDavid in American Speech (Spring-Summer 1977) reports a study showing that to introduce only restrictive clauses in mid-20th-century edited prose. The finding of 1977 should satisfy you if you are writing prose. No one seems to have considered poetry since Hall in 1917. The nonrestrictive that is not entirely dead, however; Evans 1957 hinted at its continuing use, but his two unidentified examples may be from poetry (or even older prose). We do find the use occasionally in represented speech and in speechlike prose (as, for instance, a chatty letter not intended for publication): • "I mean little Sid Mercer, that rides for me. He's the duke of them all when he lays off the liquor...." — Ring Lardner, The Big Town, 1921 • "... Take while I'm in an offering mood. I'm not the Red Cross that you can call at any emergency." — Mordecai Richler, The Apprenticeship of buddy Kravitz, 1959 • When I was in the hospital even the nurses' aides that didn't have sense enough to do anything but empty the ice-water were full of that chatter —Flan-nery O'Connor, letter, April 1956 And in January 1969 Theodore Bernstein in Winners & Sinners took time to censure two instances of nonrestrictive that that had appeared in the New York Times earlier in the month. He said that he had not had to mention such a use for years. The evidence seems to indicate, however, that nonrestrictive that is still natural to some people, even though it is not used in edited prose. The examples Fowler 1907 gives of nonrestrictive that show that commentators and grammarians were then well aware of its diminishing range. And if that was being confined to introducing restrictive clauses, might it not be useful (as well as symmetrical) to confine which to nonrestrictive clauses? The Fowler brothers thought so, as perhaps some of their predecessors had: Ayres 1881 corrected a which to a that in a restrictive clause, observing that such is the practice of "our most idiomatic writers." Bierce 1909 made a similar correction. Fowler 1926 put the proposition succinctly: • ... if writers would agree to regard that as the defining relative pronoun, & which as the non-defining, there would be much gain both in lucidity & in ease. Some there are who follow this principle now; but it would be idle to pretend that it is the practice either of most or of the best writers. Evans 1957 responds: "What is not the practice of most, or of the best, is not part of our common language." Evans's commonsensical observation did not occur to, or did not impress, most subsequent usage writers, who remember only Fowler's first sentence. The general recommendation of the majority is to follow Fowler's wish, although many of them hedge the recommendation round with exceptions, caveats, and appeals to euphony or formality. But which is as firmly entrenched in its restrictive function as in its nonrestrictive one. Joseph M. Williams in College Composition and Communications (May 1981 ) points out that even some of those who recommend using that instead of which in restrictive function use which themselves unawares. For instance, Jacques Barzun, in Simple & Direct (1975), says this in the middle of one page: • In conclusion, I recommend using that with defining clauses, except when stylistic reasons interpose. [The sylistic reasons discussed refer to a succession of thats.] And this to open the first paragraph on the next page: • Next is a typical situation which a practiced writer corrects "for style" virtually by reflex action: ... Williams also cites the discussion of which and that from Strunk & White 1959, which recommends "which-hunting," and then quotes White's own usage: • ... the premature expiration of a pig is, I soon discovered, a departure which the community marks solemnly on its calendar —E. B. White, "Death of a Pig" If the discussions in many of the handbooks are complex and burdened with exceptions, the facts of usage are quite simple. Virginia McDavid's 1977 study shows that about 75 percent of the instances of which in edited prose introduce restrictive clauses; about 25 percent, nonrestrictive ones. We conclude that at the end of the 20th century, the usage of which and that—at least in prose—has pretty much settled down. You can use either which or that to introduce a restrictive clause—the grounds for your choice should be stylistic—and which to introduce a nonrestrictive clause. A number of commentators raise the additional question of the relative formality of that and which. If you read many of them, you will find their observations contradictory. Formality does not seem to be much of a consideration in the choice of that or which. 2. "That," "which," "who"—what may they refer to? That is our most general relative pronoun, as well as our oldest. It was regularly used to refer to persons as well as to things in earlier literature: • Ah, great God that art so good —Noah's Flood, prob, written before 1425, in Everyman and Medieval Miracle Plays, ed. A. C. Cawley, 1959 (spelling modernized) • By heaven, I'll make a ghost of him that lets me — Shakespeare, Hamlet, 1601 When that came back into literary use around the beginning of the 18th century after falling out of favor during the 17th, it was noticed with some disapproval (see section 1 above) by such writers as Joseph Addison. Jespersen 1905 points out that the expressed preference for who and which may have come partly from their conforming to the Latin relative pronouns (that having no Latin correlative). Jespersen also notes that when Addison edited The Spectator to appear in book form, he changed many of his own uses of that to who or which. The 18th century also marks the first appearance of works devoted to the correction of English usage; some, naturally, discussed relative pronouns. McKnight 1928 cites an anonymous 1752 Observations upon the English Language (George Harris wrote it, says Leonard 1929), which condemned the use of that and prescribed who as "the only proper Word to be used in Relation to Persons and Animals" and which "in Relation to Things." It may be that some carryover from the 18th-century general dislike of that has produced the apparently common, yet unfounded, notion that that may be used to refer only to things. Bernstein 1971 and Simon 1980 mention receiving letters objecting to the use of that in reference to persons. The notion persists: we have heard of a professor of political science in California whose class stylesheet (in 1984) insisted that could only refer to things, and William Safire in the New York Times Magazine (8 June 1980) panned an ad beginning "We seek a managing editor that can...." That has applied to persons since its 18th-century revival just as it did before its 17th-century eclipse. Evans 1957 records an 1885 translation of the Bible that began "The Lord's Prayer" with Our Father that art in heaven using the same that used in Wycliffe's version of 1389. A few other examples: • In a letter dated Aug. 16, 1776, Horace Walpole wrote the Countess of Upper Ossory, "This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." One might add, "And a put-on to those that neither think nor feel " —Vincent Canby, N. Y. Times, 27 June 1976 • ... being filled with one of my rolls, gave the other two to a woman and her child that came down the river in the boat with us —Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography, 1788 • The woman who kissed him and—pinched his poke—was the lady that's known as Lou —Robert W. Service, "The Shooting of Dan McGrew," 1907 • "Is it my prisoner that's gone?" said Shawn in a deep voice —James Stephens, The Crock of Gold, 1912 • Ben Lucien Burman: "I would like to unmirandize any person that uses the word " —Harper 1985 In the past which was also used of persons as well as things: • Our Father which art in heaven —Matthew 6:9 (AV), 1611 • Caroline, Anna, and I have just been devouring some cold souse, and it would be difficult to say which enjoyed it most —Jane Austen, letter, 14 Jan. 1796 It has now been replaced by who and that in this function, and is usually limited to things: • ... listening to language which his actions contradicted —Jane Austen, Mansfield Park, 1814 • ... that curious access of tenderness which may bring tears to the eyes —C. E. Montague, A Writer's Notes on His Trade, 1930 • ... that voice which was such a strange amalgam of fog and frog —William Styron, This Quiet Dust and Other Writings, 1982 Which may still be used of one considered somewhat less than human: • A banshee which has long stationed itself outside my office, and who devilishly calls Pell "Mel" —Safire 1984 Which may also be used of persons in conscious echoing of an older style: • Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces — Howard 1980 (echoing Luke 20:46 (AV), 1611) Who and whom are not very controversial, save in relation to their case forms (see who, whom 1). The prescription of our anonymous 18th-century critic that who "is the only proper word to be used in Relation to Persons and Animals" seems fairly descriptive of actual use of who: • Our Father who art in heaven —Matthew 6:9 (RSV), 1946 • ... a strapping, loud woman named Doris, whom Ronda Ray fervently called a slut —John Irving, The Hotel New Hampshire, 1981 • ... the old goat who I found expiring —Daniel Defoe, Robinson Crusoe, 1719 • ... snapshots she had taken ... of the hamster who had died —John Updike, Couples, 1968 • Tonto is his cat, whom he walks on a leash —Stanley Kauffmann, Before My Eyes, 1980 Who also refers to words for entities that consist of people: • There is a very good literary society whom it would be well worth while to know —Henry Adams, letter, 23 Nov. 1859 • Texaco, who is proud to present.... —cited in Simon 1980 Summary: In current usage, that refers to persons or things, which chiefly to things and rarely to subhuman entities, who chiefly to persons and sometimes to animals. That is definitely standard when used of persons. Because that has no genitive form or construction, of which or whose must be substituted for it in contexts that call for the genitive. See whose 1. 3. Omission of "that. " See contact clause. 4. "That" repeated. That is sometimes unnecessarily doubled, Copperud 1970 tells us; it happens when an interrupting element delays the rest of the clause. Watt 1967 concurs: "Because that is such a natural, unobtrusive connective, a writer sometimes forgets that he has used it...." Robert Baker made the same discovery back in 1770, citing this sentence: • I expected that, when I told him the News, that he would be more surprised at it than he really was. "This is nonsense," says Baker bluntly. However, he does excuse the practice when enough words intervene "that it may be supposed the Reader or Hearer has so far forgot it." To illustrate this circumstance, Baker proceeds to devise a sentence in which nine typeset lines come between his first that and his second. Our suggestion would be that if you have really written your way into such an involved sentence that the reader may have forgotten your first that, you ought to start over again. 5. "That" as an adverb. Sometime in the second half of the 19th century the propriety of that as an adverb was called into question. Hall 1917 cites Alford 1866 as calling it "quite indefensible." Vizetelly 1906 calls it "wholly inexcusable" and "an unpardonable vulgarism." The condemnation is repeated in various handbooks and grammars from the turn of the century through the 1920s and 1930s. Although Bryant 1962 and Harper 1975, 1985 find this use standard, Freeman 1983 says, "That is also made to serve as an adverb where it cannot function as one." He goes on to call the adverbial that "wrongly employed for very or so" (interestingly, he doesn't like very or so either). Prentice Hall 1978 labels adverbial that colloquial and gives two example sentences: "She's that poor she can't buy food" and "I didn't like the book that much." These two examples are really different uses. In Prentice Hall's first sentence that qualifies an adjective completed by a clause. Hall 1917 cites "I am that sick I can hardly stand up" as a common locution in his part of Virginia. The American Dialect Dictionary cites many examples from various parts of the country, including one from Edith Wharton, in a novel set in New England, one from an Uncle Remus story, and one from a 1941 radio broadcast of Lowell Thomas. The OED dates this adverbial use from the 15th century and labels its survival Scottish and dialectal. Webster's Third labels it dialectal, Bryant 1962 colloquial. The second use of that as an adverb is much more common and widespread. The OED dates it back to the 17th century; Thomas Jefferson and Harriet Beecher Stowe, among others, are cited. The OED identifies the adverb as being used chiefly with adjectives to express quantity and ascribes its use in preference to so to its being more precise. Usually the amount or degree which that refers to is specified earlier in the text: • It is a hot day, in rare truth, when boys devote themselves principally to conversation and this day was that hot —Booth Tarkington, Penrod, 1914 • The Altgeld Gardens project is now considered unpoliceable. Before the Cabrini Green project became that bad, headquarters saturated the area — Gail Sheehy, McCall's, March 1971 • ... makes pronouncements about corruption in the courts, ambitious judges, plea-bargainings for the rich, lock-up pens for the poor. The only stereotype left out is police brutality, it's that clichéd a novel — Genevieve Stuttaford, Publishers Weekly, 11 Aug. 1975 That that and so are not readily interchangeable as adverbs is demonstrated by Bolinger 1980, who shows that it is possible to say of a 4-year-old "I didn't realize she was that old," where the substitution of so would be unnatural or even nonsensical since so old connotes considerable advancement in years. The most common current use, however, is in negative statements in which that is reduced more or less to an intensifier: • They may be imagined as ignorant, if you like, but not that ignorant —New Freeman, 29 Mar. 1930 • He said to Ratliff: "This town aint that big. Why hasn't Flem caught them?" —William Faulkner, The Town, 1957 • ... I often forget myself and remind them of their futures as parents. It is not that easy —Thomas J. Cottle, Saturday Rev., 1 Feb. 1969 • The movie is different, but not that different —Pauline Kael, in The Film, 1968 • McNamara was rather casual about it at first. He did not think that they were that close to a treaty — David Halberstam, Harper's, February 1971 This use in negative constructions is frequently found with the intensifier all added. See all that. Summary: that has essentially two adverbial uses, both of some longevity. In the first of these, it modifies an adjective that is followed by a clause. This use seems to be chiefly dialectal. In the second, that modifies an adjective (or occasionally an adverb). In positive constructions this that cannot usually be replaced by so. In negative constructions, that is closer to being a simple intensifier. Both aspects of the second use are standard in general prose. See also this 3. 6. For the use of pronominal that to refer to preceding ideas, topics, sentences, or paragraphs, see this 1. |
| 随便看 |
|
英语用法大全包含2888条英语用法指南，基本涵盖了全部常用英文词汇及语法点的翻译及用法，是英语学习的有利工具。