That, Which, and Who in Legal Writing
31/5/17 That, Which, and Who in Legal Writing
That introduces a restrictive clause, one that can’t be left out without changing the meaning of the sentence <all businesses that violate antitrust laws should be shut down [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][not all business, just some]>.
Which introduces a non-restrictive clause, one set off by commas and whose omission would not change the meaning <the statute, which was signed yesterday, will take effect on September 1>.
Who can be restrictive or non-restrictive; it follows the same rules <the candidate who spoke at the school won the election> <you, who disagreed with me, voted for the loser>.
[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]
