Quote:
Originally Posted by Docno
The title is correctly written as "How to write blogs that engage readers" not "How to write blogs, which engage readers". 'Engaging readers' is a defining characteristic (hence, 'that'), not an incidental one, of the blogs.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by koland
The general rule is "would it change the meaning of the sentence if the clause were removed?" If so, use THAT; otherwise, use WHICH.
Also, clauses with WHICH generally are set off with commas, while using THAT doesn't add a comma (after all, it isn't an incidental clause that can be removed...).
|
Let's go back to the book's title: How to Write Great Blog Posts that Engage Readers.
Would the meaning of the title be changed if "that Engage Readers" were removed?
I say no. The title would then be How to Write Great Blog Posts. I would argue that if the blog post failed to engage the readers, it would not be "great."
So in regard to Docno's point, I would say that the phrase "that Engage Readers" does not refer to a sub-set of the larger set of "Great Blog Posts;" and is therefore not a defining characteristic which would call for the use of the word "that."
In regard to the comma (an issue which I had not considered), my first thought is that a comma would be appropriate when the word "which" is followed by a "being-verb" such as "are," but not when it is followed by an "action-verb" such as "engage."
Perhaps this discussion should be moved to a new thread, but I would like to hear from the many English majors I suspect haunt this board!