Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Sentence structure?
Below is a sentence that has a few choice words that may be incorrect and/or unnecessary.
Example:
The magician transforms into pale green particles of light that disappear.
1. Does the sentence need "of light" to make sense?
2. Should the word "that" be replaced with ", which" since added information appears after the subject/object?
I tend to believe the word "that" would be correct since the added information is minimal, but uncertain if my view is correct.
Additionally, the addition to the sentence "of light" may not be necessary.
However, from a reader's perspective it may be a requirement.
Thank you in advance.
1 Answer
- MsBittnerLv 79 months ago
My first book, the editor nailed me on "which," which is not interchangeable with "that." I had about a bazillion corrections to make. She was gleeful about it, too, which did not endear her to me. (The next book, I asked for a different editor.)
If a comma is required because the phrase adds information that is not necessary, use which. If no comma, use that.
Necessary:
The city that I call home is Detroit.
Not necessary:
The city, which I call DEE-troit, is my home.
In your example, "that" is correct.
I think you need to keep "of light" because "pale green particles of light" are not the same as "pale green particles."
