I'm Jap

>I'm Jap
>My representation got criticized
plz assess this sentence
"How can it be handled(dealt with) for studying French to be difficult"
This 'it' means 'For studying French to be difficult' so this satisfies the grammar I think.

That sentence doesn't make sense lad sorry

really?
How about "How can I deal with studying that difficult French?"

are you trying to say "Why is it difficult to learn French?"

Or "How can i learn French without it being difficult?

nope :(

First, I think you mean "translation" not "representation."

Second, I am kind of struggling to understand what you are trying to say. Maybe you are trying to say, "How can I deal with studying French which is so difficult?"
Putting an adjective before a language like "difficult French" sounds awkward.

thx a lot
That's what I want as an answer for my question
and your interpretation is right

another Jap here
I don't know the diffrences between that and which
I have a tshirt that my parents bought in thailand and gave me
I have a thailand which my parents bought in thailand and gave me

as relative pronoun these have the same function
(関係代名詞としてはそいつらは同じ機能だぞ)

...

I tried to say "what makes French so difficult and how can I study it easily?"

Most english speakers don't either.

ありがとう
above sentenceswhich is correct?

neither do I
I don't really remember any grammar rules I just know when it sounds right/wrong

hey with your sense is OP's sentence still unappropriate?
Too complex and too strange it sounds?

Native speakers don't even know lol. Maybe that is just our dumb American education, but I don't think anybody I know could tell you which of those two statements are correct.

Use "that" for that sentence.

Basically you use that where both parts of the sentence are equally meaningful and you can omit neither. You use which where the second part of the sentence is less meaningful/informative than the first one (before which").

This tbqh.

when using 'that' as relative pronoun, this makes listeners feel a kind of frank
I was educated so, but since I'm not native I don't know the reality

>"How can it be handled(dealt with) for studying French to be difficult"

Nonsense

> "How can I deal with studying that difficult French?"

Better

But you don't put "that" before a language generally. There's only one French language.

Putting "difficult" before French also sounds strange. It sounds like you're saying "How can I deal with studying only the difficult parts of French, not the easy parts" when what you mean is "How can I deal with studying French, which is a difficult language?"

You would have to separate the adjective into another sentence. "How can I deal with studying French? It's so difficult." Or possibly "French is difficult, how can I deal with studying it?"

OP's sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Sorry mate

hey you mean 'that' is meaningful when used as in the first sentence and it can replace 'which' in the last sentence, and 'which' in the second can be omitted?

OK, I got it.
I meant to use 'that' to modify the adjective 'difficult', but after all is said and done I come to think that first of all I used thi with a wrong usage.

I meant it depends on the sentence.
"He doesn't bought a present for his friend which is weird". You can use the same sentence but without the words [which is weird] and it will not lose its meaning.
In your example with clothes we can't do that because both parts (before "that" and after "that") are equally important

rather, I think that the usage is subject to whether that is subject or object.
Both 'that' and 'which' in another jap guy's sentence have the same function as the object of the modifying sentence, so they can replace each other.
Your example is the usage as subject and then we cannot omit relative pronouns.
My thought might come from the education I got.

>"He doesn't bought a present for his friend which is weird"
Since we are in a language thread, let me just correct you for a bit.
>"He didn't buy a present for his friend"

ah, well I haven't got what you meant.
OK I see commie.your idea is worth considering

I wrote the OP sentence considering this grammatical structure.
However it is criticized as nonsense.What made you think so?

What do you mean by handled? Are you using the right word?

Sorry, mate, it just doesn't make sense at all.

'handle' means 'deal with'
well, it's too abstract I admit

What I used is the usage 2 of the word.
Oxford dictionary said so

Then an alternative is
>How can you handle [it]
>How can you handle studying a difficult language like french?
It makes sense in japanese to put the verb in the end, but in english the best way is to put the verb in the middle.

yeah I have to acknowledge that I used the passive voice.
In normal English we should use the active voice as way to represent ordinarily, right?

Yes. If you really wanted to use passive voice in that case, it would be something like this, maybe
>How can [it] be handled
>How can studying a difficult language such as french be handled
but handled in this case doesn't make much sense and would be best to replace it with 'dealt with' or 'managed'. Still sounds very awkward.

OK
Japanese often use passive voice or even don't use any subject, so my mind would be guided to this direction.
Our tendency to obscure subjects is not suitable for English.
Well, there are so many things to study English before studying French lol.

>Our tendency to obscure subjects is not suitable for English.
This is very true. English requires subjects most of the time even in the simplest of sentences.

The way I understand it, if you use "which" in a sentence, it shouldn't change the meaning

So it would be
>The magpie, which swooped me last week, was a fucking cunt

This sentence implies that the swooping is just additional info. Without the "which" segment, you can just say "The magpie was a fucking cunt". The fact that it swooped me isn't important, the magpie is just a cunt

>The magpie that swooped me last week was a fucking cunt

For this sentence, it tells us that that exact magpie that swooped me last week was a fucking cunt. In this sentence I do think the magpie was a cunt for swooping me, and that info is actually needed in the sentence

>the simplest phrase
like "it is 0:30"?
Yes this is also just grammatical subject.

>>The magpie that swooped me last week was a fucking cunt

Hey in this case 'that' can be replaced by 'which' when not using conmas.
The matter is whether the inserted sentence is just an additional phrase or not, right?
When conmas are as well inserted we tend consider it so(this case exists only when 'which' is used, and when using 'that'', inserting conmas is prohibited, then your idea is in a sense right.)

oops, for this
misquotation caused this

>The matter is whether the inserted sentence is just an additional phrase or not, right?
Exactly right

But remember that "that" and "which" sentenced don't mean the same things

Restructuring your Thai t-shirt example :

>The t-shirt, which my parents bought from Thailand, was given to me

You can remove the info about the shirt being from Thailand and the sentence stands. All that matters is the shirt was given to you.

>The shirt that my parents brought from Thailand was given to me.
Your parents didn't give you the shirt they bought from China, they gave you the particular shirt they brought from Thailand.

You can try imagining it with more context
>My parents bought shirts from Thailand, China and Singapore. The shirts THAT WERE BOUGHT FROM CHINA AND SINGAPORE were given to their friends. The shirt THAT WAS BOUGHT FROM THAILAND was given to me.

英語知れないの日本人がすごく可愛いです

what I mean is " 'the t-shirt that/which my parents gave me…' and "the t-shirt, which my parents gave me, …" have differnt nuance, right?"

not「知れない」but「知らない」
The former means ' uncapable to know', while the latter means ' merely not knowing'

わかった
ありがと

日本語知らないリーフ人はすごく可愛いです

Formally you would only use commas with "which" and you wouldn't use commas with "that"

People will use them interchangeably when speaking without knowing the difference and that's the hardest part about learning another language really

The thing is that conversational English might not be correct english a lot of the time. This sentence can easily be said in a sentence and it will make sense, but I am not sure if it is actually correct.

I was educated that when I merely give the subject/object attributes, we can use both 'that' and 'which' interchangeably.
>I was given the t-shirt that/which was made in Japan by my dad.
while when I give them additional and unnecessary information, we can only use 'which' and have to add conmas to the beginning and ending of the inserted sentence to ensure that this is just insertion, not important for the main information.
>I was given the t-shirt, which was made in Japan, by my dad
What do you say to this?

Both can be used as a relative pronoun. For example:
>The boy ate the sandwich that his mother made.
>The boy ate the sandwich which his mother made.
Both of these sentences are correct.
"That" can also be used in indirect speech.
>The student said that he was studying.

I meant in in clauses people will try to use which and that interchangeably

Grammatically it won't be correct but we'll get the gist of what you're trying to say

I agree with everything else in your post though

>clause
you mean, which as relative pronoun will be used like 'that' as conjunction?
>my mother said that my father fucked my sister again.
>my mother said which my father fucked my sister again.

you said clause, not adjective phrase to modify, so I interpreted as above

or you meant confusion between that and which was likely to happen when adopting insertions?

this thread is proof that Sup Forums doesn't shitpost or troll at literally every opportunity
*claps* good jaaaab thread! i feel warm and fuzzy inside

Most english cant even tell the difference, but here is my understanding after getting it wrong in like every essay. Other english speakers please correct if wrong.

You say "that" when the description of the thing specifies the object. You use "which" when the description of the thing is just an additional fact.

>>The tshirt that my parents bought in thailand and gave me
Here we are not talking about any old shirt, but the one that your parents got from thailand!

>>The tshirt which thailand which my parents bought in thailand and gave me
Here we already know which tshirt we are talking about. But you decided to add on the fact that your parents got it for you in thailand. "Which" indicates that the following info is extra, but the statement can be understood without it. "that" indicates that the info is essential to understanding the statement.

If you want to know if "that" or "which" is right for a sentence, try removing the information after "that' or "which" and see if the sentence still makes sense. If not, use "that"

>which thailand
oops i typoed, remove "which thailand"

so you mean, when you use that as relative pronoun the word has a similar influence to the article 'the', while 'which' just has a function to add some attributes to the modified things

Correct. "That" modifies the thing in question, picks it out of a group, similar to "the" (If I understand you correctly).

Oh, I maybe finally get what you mean
you wanted to say that people would use 'that' relative pronoun in such a way as the usage of 'which' , in other words, using it with conmas to insert some information, right?

Sorry for replying late, I was leaving the gym

By clause I mean the fragment of a proper sentence. In your example you can't use "which" because "my father fucked my sister again" is information important to the segment "My mother said". Without "that my father fucked my sister again", "my mother said" can't stand as a proper sentence on its own.

Yep. But grammatically the correct way is how I and the Canuck above me has explained it

coexistence of 'which' and 'that' as relative pronoun comes to lead to confusion of both of them as conjunction…is it your conclusive opinion?

"How can I handle it, for studying French is difficult
," is what I think you're trying to say. In that sentence, the 'it' refers to the act of studying french.

Yes, most people use 'that' and 'which' as if they mean the same thing. But technically they do not mean the same thing. Only academics use 'that' and 'which' properly.

Commas are like paragraphs, there are no strict rules about how to use them. So do not trust them.

Come on guys, you're English teachers, it should be easy to make proper sentences

I think you mean
"How can French be this difficult to deal with?"
Or
"How to deal with French that is this difficult?"

A good way to look at which and that is that which is often used in questions and then that is used in the response.

>Which shirt do you want?
>I want that shirt.

And it can also go the other way in conversation:

>Can you buy me that shirt?
>Which shirt?