Re: facts v. history; which and that

Robert Cumbow <cumbr[_at_]perkinscoie.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Jamar <sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > There is never a loss of meaning by incorrect usage of that or which.
>
> I beg to differ. Consider:
>
> "The room had one window that overlooked the parking lot."
>
> versus
>
> "The room had one window, which overlooked the parking lot."
>
> The first sentence means that the room may have had several windows and
> one of them overlooked the parking lot. The second sentence means that
> the room had only one window, and it overlooked the parking lot. If we
> accept the interchangeability of "which" and "that", then we finally do
> not know what either sentence means for sure. I call that a loss of
> meaning---as well as an impoverishment of our once-rich language.

Yes, but how about:

   "The room had one window, which overlooked the parking lot."

differs in meaning from;

   "The room had one window that overlooked the parking lot."

But:

   "The room had one window that overlooked the parking lot."

is not too different from;

   "The room had one window which overlooked the parking lot."

After all, both are only describing the nature one window.

Granted it has been some years since I took ENG101, but doesn't the main difference in the sentences come from the use of punctuation?

--

Cheers,

Robert Joseph Honan
robertus[_at_]harbornet.com
http://www.harbornet.com/folks/honan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No animals or electrons were harmed in the production of this missive.
Copyright 1997 Robert Joseph Honan