Should a relative pronoun be positioned right after a word it modifies? Always?
Hi,
I've seen (as I remember) many cases where relative pronouns are used for modifying a phrase and even a clause. In some cases, I've seen a relative pronoun modifying a word not immediately preceding it. It was written by a native speaker. Is this correct? I can't remember the exact sentence, but it was something like this: "a conference at the hotel, which deals with..."
I'm encountering this situation over and over. That is, when I need to use a relative pronoun (mostly which or that), there are also some words I want to write between the modified word and the relative pronoun, like "at the hotel" above. Should I avoid this?
Here are two sentences I've just written for my thesis.
Since the proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, all UN Member States have ratified at least one, out of nine core international human rights treaties. North Korea is a part of the 80 percent of all Member States, who have ratified four or more treaties.
The "who" in the second sentence modifies the "80 percent", not the all states. Is the position of "who" grammatically correct? If not, is there any workaround way?
I've changed that sentence like this:
"80 percent among them have ratified four or more treaties, with North Korea being a part of it."
But I'd prefer to stick to the first sentence, if correct.
Search from various English teachers...
Answers · 12
3
In general, it is good style for the relative clause to come immediately after the word it modifies. This is not a strict “grammar rule”; it’s simply common curtesy to make your writing easier to understand. Writers know what they mean, so they often assume the reader will understand them, but the reality is otherwise. When writers ignore the rule, it’s harder to read (so please don’t do that).
Your sentence: “North Korea is a part of the 80 percent of all Member States, who have ratified four or more treaties.”
Your word order is fine, since the prepositional phrase “of all member states” can be safely ignored in context. However, there are a few things that I’d recommend fixing.
1. “Who” refers to people. Please use “that” (only in restrictive relative clauses) or “which” (in any relative clauses, but especially in non-restrictive relative clauses) to refer to a country.
2. Your relative clause “that have ratified…” appears to be a restrictive relative. That is, “the 80 percent” are defined as (or “restricted to”) those states that have ratified four or more treaties. Therefore, I would prefer to use “that” rather than “which”, and definitely omit the comma.
3. I’d say “one of” instead of “a part of”, since states are countable nouns.
Suggested sentence:
North Korea is one of the 80 percent of all Member States that have ratified four or more treaties.
1
The 'who' in your sentence actually modifies 'the 80 percent of all Member States'. That is your intent, isn't it ? If so, I'd leave your sentence as it was.
1
Change "who" for "which" and you are good to go.
0
80 percent of all Member States = who ( referring to people )
80 percent among them have ratified four or more treaties, with North Korea being a part of it. ( correct)
They are both correct.
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!
Don’t miss out on the opportunity to learn a language from the comfort of your own home. Browse our selection of experienced language tutors and enroll in your first lesson now!
Start Learning Today
