After publishing my last post on grammar, I was proclaimed by one of my siblings “a real nerd.”

This public declaration of dorkery got me thinking about nerds. While the term was once pejorative, the geeks of past and present-day pop culture have a certain je ne sais quoi about them that makes them unwittingly endearing. It might be their naiveté, their constant fumbling and bungling of social situations, or their cerebral ways. And even though nerds aren’t socially adept, many times they prove to be the heart, soul, and brains of pop culture operations.

Urkel was the most memorable character on Family Matters. Fogell, aka McLovin, was clearly the star of Superbad. Napoleon Dynamite spawned a legion of imitators with his awkward, adorkable dance. Anthony Michael Hall, “the Brain,” was one of the five characters without whom The Breakfast Club would be incomplete. And does anyone not love the neurotic and overanxious yet hilarious Dr. Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory?

Inspired by the above (and other) nerds, I decided to channel my inner grammar dork and geek out on some grammar rules. Just as those nerds are integral characters in their respective TV shows and movies, grammar nerds are vital to contemporary society, which is marked by the disconcerting corrosion of good speech and writing. If it wasn’t for grammar nerds, who would uphold and defend the integrity of the English language?

Here’s my unabashedly and unapologetically nerdy attempt to uphold and defend by explaining two commonly confused grammar rules.

Indulge, nerds.

 

That vs. Which

Like Steve Urkel and Stefan Urquelle, that and which are two very different things.

Take this sentence: I like Family Matters episodes that feature Stefan Urquelle.

This sentence means I’m very particular when it comes to Family Matters episodes. I don’t like just any episode; I like only those episodes in which Stefan appears.

Stefan: the epitome of suave and debonair.

Now take this sentence: I like Family Matters episodes, which feature Stefan Urquelle.

This means that I like all Family Matters episodes. And on a separate note, Family Matters episodes feature the character Stefan. If I leave out the clause “which feature Stefan Urquelle,” the meaning of the sentence doesn’t change. It doesn’t change the fact I like Family Matters. The clause introduced by “which” is simply extra information. It adds detail to the sentence, and it tells people a little bit more about the TV show, but it’s not essential to the meaning of the sentence.

Like most grammar rules, the rule about when to use that and when to use which can get complicated and nuanced, but there is a simple guideline: if a clause provides extra information not essential to the meaning of the sentence, use which. If leaving out a clause would change the meaning of the sentence, use that.

Here’s the rule in action:

My ID that has my college picture is in my wallet.

This implies that I have more than one ID (like Fogell in Superbad), and the one with my college picture is the one in my wallet.

Fogell posing as McLovin: the epitome of adolescent awkwardness.

My ID, which has my college picture, is in my wallet.

This means that I have one ID, and said ID is in my wallet. The clause “which has my college picture” is like extra, nonessential information; it tells people a little bit about my ID, but if I take the clause out, it doesn’t change the fact that my ID is in my wallet.

Also, clauses that begin with the word “which” are set off by commas.

Another example:

I love the issue of Entertainment Weekly that has the cast of The Big Bang Theory on the cover.

In this sentence I need to use the word “that.” If I left out the clause “that has the cast of The Big Bang Theory on the cover,” I would be left with, “I love the issue of Entertainment Weekly.” This is incomplete, vague, and it doesn’t really make sense. Taking out the clause distorts the meaning of the sentence. There are many issues of Entertainment Weekly, but the issue that I love is the one with Sheldon Cooper et al. on the cover.

 

Who vs. Whom

Ah, the befuddling who vs. whom debate, notorious for puzzling students, writers, and speakers alike. Although the rule regarding who and whom seems as complicated as the theoretical-physics statements Sheldon Cooper spews, it’s actually quite simple.

Who refers to the subject of a sentence. Whom refers to the object of a sentence.

If you don’t have an eidetic memory like one of my favorite nerds, Dr. Spencer Reid from Criminal Minds, and don’t remember those grammar lessons from middle school, a subject does something. An object has something done to it.

Some examples:

It is Napoleon Dynamite who dances in front of his peers.

I need to use who here, because it functions as the subject. It is doing something (that something is dancing in front of his peers).

Pedro is the boy whom I voted for.

“I” is the subject of the sentence, because I am the one doing the voting. Pedro is the object; I voted for Pedro. Therefore, whom is correct.

Napoleon and Pedro: sauntering the school halls in style.

My high school English teacher taught me a trick when it comes to who and whom. Turn the sentence into a question. If you can answer the question with he, use who. If you can answer it with him, use whom. Like this:

Who danced in the talent show? He danced in the talent show. (Use who.)

Who did I vote for? I voted for him. (Use whom.)

 

The Quest of a Grammar Nerd

A lot of nerds embark upon missions: Fogell attempts to buy beer using a fake ID; Urkel desperately tries to win the heart of Laura; Screech tries in vain to woo Lisa; and Napoleon tries to get Pedro elected. Grammar nerds also set out on quests, mainly trying to correct and prevent the butchering of the English language. I hope in the end we’ll come out looking more like Pedro and less like Screech.

View the original post at Mainstreethost.