ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

That's true, although I should note that a comma doesn't just work in front of "which": it's required. Similarly, there shouldn't be a comma before "that."

Additionally, to remember which one is which, you could try the old trick of putting “by the way” after that/which. If it sounds all right, it should be “which.”

E.g.

“My socks, which (by the way) are hanging up over there.” (works)
“My socks that (by the way) are hanging up over there.” (doesn’t work)

hmm. try living in glasgow for a bit. "by the way" works after absolutely everything, byrraway.

This is all making it more clear-cut than it sometimes is. I quite often come across examples where it's kind of a grey area whether one is defining or informing. And am sometimes tempted in those cases to get across that greyness by putting a which without a comma before.

If you want an example of someone who flouts the that/which rule as a matter of course, download and listen to Kate Adie introduce From Our Own Correspondent each week on Radio 4. I know most people don't even know the rule, but they must instinctively have a bit of an ear for it, because Adie sticks out so much. I think someone must have once told her "that" was common or something.

I'm kinda endlessly surprised by how mixed people get on that/which when writing, since folks follow it pretty decently (when necessary) in speech. (The main problem seems to be that when writing, people try to use "which" for "that" on the grounds that it sounds classier, something they'd NEVER do when speaking.)

Folks don't much talk classy.

The situation in which I'm most likely to accidentally deviate from the rule is in a sentence with a compound "that." The second one often turns into a "which." Viz.:

"This is the kind of rule that I usually follow but which gets me into trouble sometimes."

I feel like proper usage dictates that it should be "but that gets me into trouble," but for some reason "which" just sounds better after a conjunction: it seems more solid, I guess.

We had this whole 'which' / 'that' debate at great length upthread. It is true that you can't use 'that' in non-defining relative clauses (only which), but it's not true that you can't use 'which' in defining relative clauses (you can use 'which' or 'that').

I think that's right nabisco. When I was writing papers, my first editing step was to just do a find on 'which' and 9 times out of 10, I'd realise it should've been a 'that'. Instinct leads you to type 'which' when trying to sound scholarly.

Wikipedia says: "(re:which or that)....Of the two, only which is at all common in non-restrictive clauses. Problems arise in restrictive clauses, where traditionally either that or which could be used. This is still the case in normal speech and in British English, but in formal American English it is generally recommended to use only that for restrictive clauses." So this is obviously just a British v American thing.

You wrote that wikipedia entry!

No, I didn't. I'm not sure what a restrictive clause is, for a start.

I have never disputed that which is true.
I have never disputed which which is true.
I have never disputed that that is true.

What about which that?

“It’s even easier when you don’t care whom you kill.”

Doesn’t this passage look really odd? The one below looks better, IMO, but is the one above even acceptable?

“It’s even easier when you don’t care about whom you kill.”

Eh, sentence, even.

"It's even easier when you don't care who you kill."

Fixed!

Isn't "caring about" ambiguous here, because it could mean not having feelings for the victim rather than not caring about their identity?

I think we're seeing a breakdown of the who/whom distinction. There are cases in which the use of 'whom', although tradionally correct, now looks a bit odd and you should use 'who' instead.

Thanks. I found it in this Slate piece, which is why I was a bit puzzled. =)

Isn't "caring about" ambiguous here, because it could mean not having feelings for the victim rather than not caring about their identity?

isn't "who you kill" a subject/predicate on its own? So who is acceptable over whom? It's been a while since I studied this stuff. I'm rusty and mostly operating by feel.

I think I only use "whom" when it's part of a prepositional phrase. "Around whom did you fanny" for instance.

MS Office tells me this is wrong, is it?

"...this task could take an additional three or four man-hours to sort out..."

It says that I should delete the word "an." WTF?

MS Office is full of shit half of the time.

Man, just do CTRL-A, DELETE... problem solved.

WTF I JUST DID THAT YOU ASSHOLE

HOW DO I MAKE IT GO BACK OH GOD IT WAS 18 PAGES LONG

I GUESS THAT'S 3-4 LESS MAN-HOURS

Funny guy.

"Treatment for asthma and pulmonary disease are not identical"

the prob I see with using "treatments" is it no longer reads like a 1-to-1 comparison.

Add a "the" to the start?

I'd keep treatment singular, but add another 'for' for clarity:
"Treatment for asthma and for pulmonary disease are not identical"

The treatment (singular) sits clunkily with "are" though.

"Treatment ... are"?

xpost

I'm putting the s on in a query, ja

The treatment for asthma and that for pulmonary disease are not identical.

I r a medical editor. Therefore you must do as I say and use 'The treatments.'

xpost jaymc I love you but that is horrible.

yes, esp as it also has to go in a callout.

wait asthma IS a pulmonary disease!

Sentence is too long. Consider simply going with "Fixin' lungs is tough."

Asthma is treated differently than other pulmonary diseases.

xpost jaymc I love you but that is horrible.

Well, if it were up to me, I'd probably use "treatments," but the good Dr. Morbius seemed like he wanted to avoid that.

"The treatment for asthma is not identical to the treatment for pulmonary disease."

I shortened it, quincie; the other disease is actually COPD, but I didn't wnat to confuse the civilians...

I dunno. "The love I have for Berlin and for Paris are quite different."
You wouldn't want "loves" there, would you? The second love is simply understood without being written out.

Asthma and COPD are treated differently.

DO I WIN OR WHAT?