997. This week, I help you learn (and remember!) the difference between "which" and "that" with practical tips and examples about cupcakes. Then, we take a linguistic stroll through walking-related terms, including "perambulate," "sashay," and "traipse."
997. This week, I help you learn (and remember!) the difference between "which" and "that" with practical tips and examples about cupcakes. Then, we take a linguistic stroll through walking-related terms, including "perambulate," "sashay," and "traipse."
The "words for walking" segment was written by Michaela Dunn, a Wyoming-based editor and publisher for Everywhen Press. She specializes in magical realism, low fantasy, folklore, and fairy tales.
| Edited transcript with links: https://grammar-girl.simplecast.com/episodes/which/transcript
| Watch my LinkedIn Learning writing courses.
| Please take our advertising survey. It helps! https://podsurvey.com/GRAMMAR
| Grammarpalooza (Get texts from Mignon!): https://joinsubtext.com/grammar or text "hello" to (917) 540-0876.
| Subscribe to the newsletter for regular updates.
| HOST: Mignon Fogarty
| VOICEMAIL: 833-214-GIRL (833-214-4475) or https://sayhi.chat/grammargirl
| Grammar Girl is part of the Quick and Dirty Tips podcast network.
| Theme music by Catherine Rannus.
| Grammar Girl Social Media Links: YouTube. TikTok. Facebook. Instagram. LinkedIn. Bluesky. Threads. Mastodon.
Grammar Girl here. I’m Mignon Fogarty, your friendly guide to the English language. We talk about writing, history, rules, and other cool stuff. Since last week I mentioned using commas for "which" clauses, I thought it'd be good to talk about the difference between "which" and "that" this week. And after that, we'll talk about fun words for walking like "traipse" and "sashay."
By Mignon Fogarty
To understand the difference between “which” and “that,” first you need to understand the difference between a restrictive element and a non-restrictive element, because the simple rule is to use “that” with a restrictive element and “which” with a non-restrictive element.
So a restrictive element is just part of a sentence you can’t get rid of because it specifically restricts the noun. Here’s an example:
The cupcakes that have sprinkles are still in the fridge.
The words “that have sprinkles” restrict the kind of cupcake we’re talking about. Without those words, the meaning of the sentence would change. Without them, we’d be saying that all the cupcakes are still in the fridge, not just the ones with sprinkles.
And restrictive elements are not surrounded by commas.
Here’s another example:
Cupcakes that are decorated for the Fourth of July are on sale.
We can’t get rid of the words “that are decorated for the Fourth of July” because then we’d be saying all cupcakes are on sale, not just the special ones; so that means the phrase is restrictive.
And here's one more example:
Cupcakes that have strawberries give me hives.
I can’t get rid of the words “that have strawberries” because then I’d be saying all cupcakes give me hives, not just the ones with strawberries, which isn’t true. I can eat all kinds of cupcakes, just not those that have strawberries.
On the other hand, a non-restrictive element is something that can be left out without changing the meaning of the sentence. A nonrestrictive element is simply additional information.
Cupcakes with sprinkles, which are my favorite, always seem to get eaten first.
Leaving out the words “which are my favorite” doesn’t change the meaning of the sentence. With or without the words “which are my favorite,” we know that cupcakes with sprinkles are the first to go. And nonrestrictive elements are surrounded by commas. The way I think of it is that you could grab both those commas, pick up the element, and throw it out of your sentence, and it would still make sense.
Here’s another example:
The cupcakes that are on sale, which are decorated for the Fourth of July, all have sprinkles.
We could lift out the words “which are decorated for the Fourth of July” and the meaning of the sentence wouldn’t change. Those words just give us some extra information, meaning they’re non-restrictive, surrounded by commas, and “which” is the right word. And you may recall from last week's episode that these words could also be surrounded by parentheses or dashes, depending on what kind of tone you want for your sentence.
Here’s a final example:
Cupcakes, which don't need to be cut into pieces for serving, are a great choice for children's parties.
Again, we could pick up the words “which don't need to be cut into pieces for serving,” throw them out, and not change the meaning of the sentence. Cupcakes are still a great choice for children's parties. Those words, “which don't need to be cut into pieces for serving,” are just extra information, meaning they’re non-restrictive, surrounded by commas, and “which” is the right word choice.
Here’s a Quick and Dirty Tip for the simple rule: If you think of the Wicked Witch ("Which") of the West from "The Wizard of Oz," you know it’s OK to throw her out. She’s bad, so we want to get rid of her. We’re going to pick up the wicked witch and throw her out, just like you can pick up the “which” part of your sentence and throw it out. You won’t change the meaning of the sentence without the “which” phrase. So, you can throw out the which (or witch) phrase, commas and all. If you can do that, and it doesn’t change the main meaning of the sentence, then you know that “which” is the right choice. If you try to throw out the phrase and it does change the meaning of the sentence, then you know the right choice is “that” instead of “which” because it’s a restrictive element.
That’s the simplified rule that I find works for a lot of people who get frustrated trying to decide which word to use.
But you also should know that the situation is more complicated than what I just explained. That was the safe rule. You’ll never go wrong with it, but some authorities say that “which” can actually be used for both restrictive and non-restrictive phrases, and it’s actually very common for people who use British English to use “which” when American speakers would use “that.” The distinction between the two just hasn’t held up in British English the way it has in American English.
So if you’re British, know that some Americans might think you’ve made a mistake when you use “which” with a restrictive element, or they may be dazzled by your accent and not even notice because we’re like that.
And if you’re American but you love the sound of the word “which” in all your sentences and want to use it, if anyone challenges you — well, you can just say you’re using British English. I do think the distinction between the two words is useful, though, because they can convey different ideas.
Consider these two examples:
Cupcakes that are time-consuming to make tend to be crowd-pleasers.
Cupcakes, which are time-consuming to make, tend to be crowd-pleasers.
In the first example — "Cupcakes that are time-consuming to make tend to be crowd-pleasers" — I’m saying there are different kinds of cupcakes: some that are time-consuming to make and some that aren't. And probably only those that are time-consuming to make are the crowd pleasers.
In the second example — "Cupcakes, which are time-consuming to make, tend to be crowd-pleasers" — I’m saying that, at least to me, all cupcakes are time-consuming to make.
And I think that can be a useful distinction.
And I’ll finish this segment with a little grammatical aside. When they’re used in the way we’ve been talking about, “that” and “which” are called relative pronouns. I know it seems weird because you usually think of pronouns as words such as “he” and “she.” Relative pronouns don’t get talked about as much as other pronouns, but they are real pronouns. They head up subordinate clauses. Other relative pronouns include “who,” “whom,” “why,” “where,” and “when.”
To sum up, the simplest rule is to choose the relative pronoun “that” when you can’t get rid of the element and the relative pronoun “which” when you can get rid of the element and it won’t change the meaning of the sentence. Remember that it’s always safe to throw out the “whiches.”
By Michaela Dunn
As the weather gets nicer, it’s time to amble back outside and spend time traipsing through the flowers. Since we previously meandered through eight words for walking with surprising origins, we are going to ambulate through six more words to prepare for walking weather.
To “ambulate” simply means “to walk or move about” and popped up around the 1620s. “Ambulate” stems from the Latin “ambulatus,” the past participle of "ambulare" with the same meaning. But this word is so much more. “Ambulate” is linked to “amble,” meaning to move easily and gently just as a horse does when it lifts the two legs on one side and then the two on the other side. On the more loud side of the etymology, the same root also gives us the word "ambulance," which was originally a moveable hospital.
Now, the words “perambulate” and "ambulate" both come from the Latin root “ambulare.” You may often hear "perambulate" used as a fancy word to say someone walked, but technically, perambulate refers to walking through, about, or over something even though it does come from the more general word "amble." This particular form first appeared in the 15th century, predating “ambulate.” The only difference between “ambulate” and “perambulate” is obviously the prefix “per-,” which also comes from the Latin, where it means “through.” It's the addition of that prefix that changes the meaning to “walk through.”
Do you ever go on a constitutional after dinner? Well, the meaning of this type of “constitutional” does not pertain to a “body of rules, customs or laws.” Instead, it comes from the good it can do a body’s constitution, specifically an individual's physical health, strength and appearance. Although the root of "constitution" goes back to relating to the settled upon law and regulations, the meaning eventually led to the settled condition of one’s health, whether they have a weak constitution or a strong constitution.
A “constitutional” is short for “constitutional walk,” referring to an act of walking that is “beneficial to bodily health.” Etymoline speculates the “constitutional walk” most likely originated around 1829 among university students as they were taking walks or exercising.
For those familiar with ballet, a “sashay” refers to a “gliding step.” Though the reference to dancing is the typical use, “sashay” also refers to a “casual walk or glide” and a walk that is ostentatious or provocative. Again, according to Etymonline, the word “sashay” is mangled English of the French word “chassé,” meaning “chased.”
Sashaying onward to the word "traipse," the origin of this one is a bit of a head-scratcher since sources ultimately say the origin is unknown. It means to walk about aimlessly, and some people think the word may come from the Old French word “trespasser,” which meant to pass over or beyond. The Oxford English Dictionary says it can also mean "to tramp or trudge," and another possible origin could be words from a variety of European languages meaning to “tramp; wander; flee," such as the Middle Dutch “trappen,” dialectal Norwegian “trappa,” or German “traben.” According to Etymonline, there is even evidence to show “traipse” was slang used by soldiers and vagabonds between 1400 and 1700.
We'll end our walk today with a “promenade.” This word came into English directly from French in the 1560s, and although you may be having flashbacks to square dancing classes in grade school if you grew up in the United States — and it is a word used in dancing — in the walking sense, a promenade is “a leisurely walk, a walk for pleasure or display.” And if you're thinking of the Promenade Deck on "The Love Boat," a TV series that was popular in the '70s and '80s, yes, that deck on a cruise ship is the one that lets passengers walk around the perimeter. It's a place to either get some exercise or to see and be seen, depending on your perspective.
That segment was written by Michaela Dunn, a Wyoming-based editor and publisher for Everywhen Press. She specializes in magical realism, low fantasy, folklore, and fairy tales.
Finally, I have a familect story from Andrea.
Hi, this is Andrea Phillips. I live in Tennessee, but my family is from Texas and Oklahoma. And I was recently with my brother, and we used the word that I thought might be a good example of a familect. So I was at my brother's house for my nephew's graduation, and we were getting food ready for all the guests coming to the cookout. And my sister-in-law asks my brother if he got a "bottleadammit." He said he did. I said, "Oh, good!A bottleadammit." And we all knew that we were talking about a watermelon. As long as I can remember, going back to my grandparents' house and my family's origin, we have always called a watermelon a bottleadammit. The story goes that my father, when he was a little boy, couldn't say "watermelon," and it came out "bottleadammit," and everybody thought that was funny and just started calling watermelons "bottleadammit." So today, we don't use it all the time, and we only use it amongst ourselves. Most of the time, we do call watermelon "watermelon," but it's like a family code word when one of us calls a watermelon a bottleadammit. And now that my dad's kids are starting families of their own, my dad's grandkids, rather, are starting families of their own, well, we just have to see if that tradition continues to future generations or if it's going to die with us, or maybe if this gets shared on the podcast, somebody else might pick it up. And by the way, I have no idea how to spell "bottleadammit." It's just a word that we say. I don't think I've ever seen it written down. I hope you found that funny, maybe interesting. Thanks for letting me share.
Thanks so much, Andrea! Watermelons are great for family get-togethers, which is also a great time to have some fun and reinforce your familects for the younger generations.
If you want to share your familect, a word or phrase your family and only your family uses, call the voicemail line at 83-321-4-GIRL. Call from a nice quiet place, and get sure to tell me the story behind your familect because that's always the best part.
Finally, my mission this summer is to tell every educator I can reach about my LinkedIn Learning courses because they are FREE through most university and county libraries, and they contain the perfect bite-sized lessons for your students.
Do they struggle with active and passive voice? I have a 3-minute video about it! Parallel structure? I have a 3-minute video about it! Comma splices? You guessed it — I have a 3-minute video about it!
And, all these professionally produced videos also have carefully edited transcripts for your students who need read-along support.
The videos make great bell ringers or assignments, and the courses themselves have built in chapter quizzes.
And did I mention they are often free through your library?
So if you're thinking about fall lesson plans, check out my courses and think about how you can incorporate these practical videos to make your teaching job easier. And if you aren't a teacher, do me and them a favor and pass this information along. I want to be sure as many people are benefitting from these free videos as possible.
Grammar Girl is a Quick and Dirty Tips podcast. Thanks to Holly Hutchings in digital operations, Davina Tomlin in marketing; Nathan Semes, in audio; Brannan Goetschius, director of podcasts; and Morgan Christianson in advertising who has 2 nephews and 1 niece.
And I’m Mignon Fogarty, better known as Grammar Girl. Remember to look for the show again Thursday, when I have an interview with my frequent guest writer Samantha Enslen and her husband Greg because they recently bought their hometown newspaper, which I think is just about the best thing ever.
That's all. Thanks for listening.