Conciseness Solves Problems

Yes, yes, the technical term is concision, but that’s not the word people use, except for us pretentious professionals. The word means to take out unnecessary words. Taking out the three unnecessary words here solves two problems. First panel:

Take out “was it that” and you have a much cleaner sentence, and it fixes two errors.

• Use “who,” not “that” when you refer to people.
• “It,” as spoken in the sentence, is a meaningless predicate nominative. Bad.

So just ask, “Who said ‘I’m not young enough to know everything?’ “

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

I think I mentioned in the past that “who” is for referring to people, and “that” is for referring to things. Lots of people use “that” for both. Don’t!

Here’s a good example of why that makes a difference.

One of the five Finnish government parties is digging its heels in over new legislation for indigenous people that would enshrine their rights in Finnish law.

• “That” refers to “legislation”
• “Who” refers to indigenous people.

Since “People” is closer to the word, you might be inclined to think it refers to the people.

So who does the enshrining? The people or the legislation?

Here’s the picture that goes with the headline:

Use “this” to refer to things that are generally within arm’s reach, and use “that” to refer to things far enough away to have to point to them. This guy gets it backwards and kind of ruins the joke.

When should you use “that,” and when do you use “which”?

The rule:

• Use “that” in restrictive clauses
• Use “which” in non-restrictive clauses

HUH?

• If the information is necessary, that’s restrictive. For example: “…includes an account that has been set up within the modeled organization’s General Ledger…”
• If the info is just added info, that’s non-restrictive. For example: “…includes uncollected funds, which is what distinguishes it from collected balance…”

Rule of thumb: “Which” follows a comma, “that” doesn’t.

Here’s a rather busy example: “…an account that has been set up that includes uncollected funds, which is what distinguishes it from collected balance”

Another rule of thumb: Using “which” when you mean “that” is being pretentious. It’s fancier than necessary. If “that” works, don’t use “which.”

Maybe I should say it’s a subtle difference (nah). The rule as mentioned in the comic is correct.

Use the relative pronoun “who” for people, and “that” for everything else.

Harrumpf.