LawProse Lessons

which (4). Today: “And which”; but which.” To use either expression properly, a nonrestrictive “which”-clause parallel to the “and which” or “but which” must come first. E.g.: “Sutherland could have vetoed the $526 million budget, which he drafted this fall and which the council rewrote last month.” Lisa Kremer, “Pierce Budget Won’t Get Sutherland’s Signature,”

which (3). Today: Beginning Sentences with “which.” Increasingly in modern prose, “Which” is being used to begin an incomplete sentence. Is this permissible? Yes, the answer must be — primarily in three instances. First, the introductory “Which” can be not only appropriate but also effective when the preceding sentence is long and the conclusion is

which (2). Today: Wrongly Applied to People. Unlike “that” — which can apply to either things or people — “which” applies only to things. If people are referred to, the nonrestrictive relative pronoun is “who” — e.g.: “Rights advocates and officials in Zaire protested the treatment of the illegal immigrants, some of which [read ‘whom’]

which (1). Today: Generally. “Which,” used immoderately, is possibly responsible for more bad sentences than any other in the language. Small wonder that James Thurber wrote: “What most people don’t realize is that one ‘which’ leads to another. . . . Your inveterate whicher . . . is not welcome in the best company.” “Ladies’

Miscellaneous Entries. Wednesday is pronounced /WENZ-day/ or /WENZ-dee/. But some precisians want to — and do — say /WED-nuhz-day/, which is simply incorrect. The first “-d-” has long been silent. weight, vb.; weigh. “For purposes of calculating the scores, the questions are weighted for their difficulty.” Should the word be “weight” or “weigh”? The answer

whether (3). Today: “Of whether.” “Whether” usually directly follows the noun whose dilemma it denotes: “decision whether,” “issue whether,” “question whether.” But “regardless,” an adverb, makes “regardless of whether.” Although “issue whether” is typically better than “issue of whether,” the latter phrase has certain justifiable uses in which “of” is obligatory, usually when “issue” is

whether (2). Today: “As to whether.” In The King’s English 344 (3d ed. 1931), the Fowler brothers describe this phrasing as “seldom necessary.” That judgment still stands — e.g.: o “Surprisingly, most folks have never taken the time to learn this skill . . . , [which] may mean the difference as to whether [read

whether (1). Today: “Whether or not.” Despite the superstition to the contrary, the words “or not” are usually superfluous, since “whether” implies “or not” — e.g.: o “In another essay, ‘The Rules of the Game,’ he discusses moral codes and whether or not [read ‘whether’] they work.” Diane Hartman, “At Life’s End, Carl Sagan Awed

Miscellaneous Entries. wastewater. One word. way(s). In the sense “the length of a course or distance,” “way” is the standard term {a long way}. “Ways” is dialectal. So it’s surprising to find “ways” in serious journalism — e.g.: “This is premature, of course; Fox still has a ways to go [read ‘some way to go’?]

whet. “Whet” (= to sharpen or stimulate) commonly appears in the cliché “whet the appetite.” Unfortunately, though, “whet” is often confused with “wet” (= to moisten, dampen, or drench) — e.g.: o “More importantly, he wet [read ‘whetted’] the appetite of Atlanta and presumably much of the country for an Olympics that, at least in

*where it’s at. This phrase and its variants have long set up parents’ and teachers’ classic grammatical correction: “Where’s my lunchbox at?” “Between the a and the t.” Besides the “sin” (to many early-educators) of ending a sentence with a preposition, the “at” is redundant, adding nothing to “where it is” or “where is it?”

where. Part A: For “in which.” In formal prose, “where” should not be used as a relative pronoun instead of as a locative — thus, not *”case where” but “case in which.” But if you want a relaxed tone, “where” may be more suitable. In the following example, the contraction “I’ve” might not comfortably fit

Miscellaneous Entries. waiting in line; waiting on line. The former is the standard American English expression. The latter is a regionalism in the Northeast, especially in New York. Although some might think that it’s the product of the computer age (i.e., being “online”), in fact it dates back to the 19th century. wake; awake; awaken.

what with. This phrase — meaning “in view of,” “in consequence of,” or “considering (one or more specified things)” — dates back to Old English. It begins an adverbial phrase — e.g.: o “This is a city in perpetual health crisis, what with drugs, AIDS, and teenage pregnancy, not to mention the occasional appearance of

what it is is. Sentences with this ungainly construction seem much on the rise, although examples can be found in older sources: o “What the O’Rourke study really is is simply a glorified set of examinations in grammar.” Janet Rankin Aiken, Commonsense Grammar 244 (1936). o “What it is is a judicious mixing of standard

whatever; whatsoever. Part A: Intensive Use. As an intensive (meaning “at all”), “whatsoever” is an established idiom in American English {he had no reason whatsoever}, though it is obsolescent in British English. Still, many American stylists prefer the shorter word, “whatever” — e.g.: “OPIC provides no grants or free benefits of any kind to any