Jump to content

Talk:That

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ravenpuff (talk | contribs) at 00:04, 8 December 2021 (→top: Fix DYK entry). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconEnglish Language Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

out of curiousity

is it grammatically allowed to have two that's?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bud0011 (talk • contribs) .

That makes "those". -Goldom (t) (Review) 05:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, i don't follow Bud0011 05:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

if you are talking about the word 'that', then cant you say 'That that'

If you are talking about a thing called 'That' that said the word 'that' then cant you say: That 'that', that that That said was 'that'.

There is more than one meaning of "that" - as a pronoun or to join two clauses together (eg. "I see that it's raining"). You don't need to quote "that" in order to have a grammatically correct sentence with two "thats" next to each other. Eg. I hope that that chicken is edible. If you think about the two "thats" in that sentence, you'll see they don't have exactly the same meaning as each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.27.34 (talk) 00:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ooop0l00pp000000p0p00p0 2601:244:5100:83C0:852B:8AD:9DE1:1561 (talk) 02:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2007-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot message

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 10:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He said that that can be used as a pronoun.

Starting a sentence with 'that'

A friend told me that it's grammatically incorrect to start a sentence with the word 'that'. Is this true? PolarisSLBM 16:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That such sentences are acceptable is beyond question. Is this ok? 67.130.129.135 17:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks good to me, as long as the pronoun has a clear reference in context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.113.172 (talk) 22:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. That that 'that' is accetable appears to be the consensus.67.130.129.135 (talk) 22:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated reference

moved comment to bottom of page and added heading Phaunt (talk) 15:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fourth reference link, about the pattern being infinitely repeatable, goes to a page of links rather than an article. -71.28.192.37 (talk) 05:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the reference and added a {{fact}} tag. Phaunt (talk) 15:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Indefinitely' is probably a better word than 'infinitely'. Formal grammars generally stipulate that a well formed sentence must be finite. 67.130.129.135 (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated "that"s

This section is fun but does it really fit in an encyclopedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.66.73 (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly notable, but could perhaps be trimmed as giving undue weight to a minor point of interest. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see that that section was removed. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Ꝥ?

I moved the redirect for ꝥ to Ꝥ, as there is an article for it now. However, all of the information in this article is either about Ꝥ, and so belongs in the main article, or is about the word's function, and so belongs in the Wiktionary article. So could this article be merged with Ꝥ? LokiClock (talk) 21:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC) On second thought, most of the information really wouldn't be relevant to ꝥ... LokiClock (talk) 23:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't see this word or if you on a similar Wikipedia website called "Uncyclopedia" which contains with all every 'that' they used in a sentence or information about this article the word 'that' about 100% guaranteed, thanks for this caution TheArticleExperience (talk) 13:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ampliarlo, por favor

Hello, I am an english student, and this article is to small. "That" is very important in english, please could some people develop this article???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.251.106.11 (talk) 19:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. A link is provided to the Wiktionary entry on "that". Please follow the link for more information on the word; you may expand the Wiktionary article on it or request that someone else does so. Elizium23 (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Italic title

Given that WP:ITALICTITLE says to italicize the title if italics would be used in running text, and WP:WORDSASWORDS says that words as words are italicized in running text, should this title (which is a "word as word") not be italicized? Victor Yus (talk) 14:59, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. The word "that" is just a word. The running text means that if you are referring to a novel or a film, you would normally italicize the names in running text. Therefore, the title name should be italicized. I thnk you're misinterpreting WORDSASWORDS to be connected to the principle stated in ITALICTITLE. By your interpretation, almost all words would have italic titles.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only if the article is about the word itself, as it is in this case. (Whether it's appropriate to have an article about this word in Wikipedia is another matter.) The articles Cat and Dog and millions of others would not have italic titles, since they are not primarily about the words cat and dog, but about the things that those words denote. In running text you would not italicize "cat" and "dog" if you are using them to refer to cats and dogs, nor would you normally italicize "that" if you're using it in a sentence with one of its normal meanings; but you would italicize it (in Wikipedia's style) if you were using it to refer to the word that (as I did just then). Victor Yus (talk) 08:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WORDSASWORDS doesn't say anything about the title of the article, and the title of the article isn't "running text" anyway. It is a guideline, BTW, that I'd never seen before and have unwilfully ignored for many years now: I am in the habit of using quotation marks to write about words as words, and italics for foreign words. But don't tell anyone, certainly not Mandarax. Drmies (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Poor example

"...to introduce a restrictive relative clause ("The test that she took was hard.") In this role that may be analyzed either as a relative pronoun or as a conjunction as in the first case...."

Could someone come up with a better example for this type of use? "The test that she took was hard," is confusing as the sentence should properly read: "The test she took was hard." No "that" is needed nor should it be used. Risssa (talk) 03:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have seen "that" used in this way, but of course also often omitted. I was not aware of a BE/AE distinction here, but it seems plausible. I have a gripe with another example though... 130.226.239.133 (talk) 13:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I have an example that is hard to paraphrase without a relative pronoun "that" or "which", but "that" is arguably more natural here: "I like doors that open to the outside." Yes, "I hate dogs that are messy" could be contracted to "I hate messy dogs", but that doesn't work anymore when the relative clause isn't simply attaching a predicate to the object (its subject). 130.226.239.133 (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Poorer example

"I hate that dogs are messy" is not an example of "that" being used as a relative pronoun, but as a subordinating conjunction, as "dogs are messy" is a clause that is the object of the whole clause ("I hate..."), instead of forming a clause with the object of the whole clause, as "are messy" does with "dogs" in "I hate dogs that are messy" and "was hard" does with "the test" in "The test that she took was hard". 130.226.239.133 (talk) 13:26, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Usage in American English

The first two bullet points indicate restrictions on the way 'that' is used in American English:

  • ("He asked that she go.") ("That" is not used this way in American and Canadian English.)
  • (In American and Canadian English, "that" is only used in this way if the verb could affect the proceeding noun, i.e., one would say "The test she took was hard," but would still say "I hate that dogs are messy" to avoid being misheard as saying "I hate dogs.")

According to whom?? That simply is not true. I can't really speak for Canadian English, but in America 'that' is used in both those forms all the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.175.134.111 (talk) 15:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to an IP that added it a a few years ago (adding it to the article in two places), but not according to another IP editor, who tagged one of these two sentences as needing a citation in January 2017. The tagged sentence was removed in February 2017 by User:CopperWhopper67 for being unsourced.
As a native speaker of American English, I believe this material is incorrect and have removed it. This is an official by-the-books WP:CHALLENGE and the claim should not be re-introduced until someone can produce a reliable, non-WP:CIRCULAR source that says this is a signficant point. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia How to need is 'that'?

Is this article all that? Please give a Link with all every 'that' for making article? TheArticleExperience (talk) 13:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new Wikipedian, and don't know how it is. please give a Link all every "That" to the article. When I try to do that — Preceding unsigned comment added by EIBaluyot2003 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new Wikipedian

I'm new to Wiki and dont know how to do this - please link all every "that" to the article. when I tried That, the text came up as highlight will bold instead of a link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EIBaluyot2003 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These appear in bold because they're self links. Why would you want to link an article back to itself? – Uanfala (talk) 01:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment about This, These, That, Those.

Example for apples. When it using "this" you have just one apple in front of somebody that is being to unknowing what is an actual apple by signal, then you ensure it saying what is an apple (and so on for These). When it using "that" you have one apple between some things (whether or not they are apples) by signal, then you ensure it saying which one is an apple (and so on for Those). I think, this/these vs that/those take the different way to use when being needs for distinguise or not distinguise from other things but not when speaker is closer or far to the apple/apples. ¿Somebody talk something about it? --109.167.127.122 (talk) 03:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can use this/these and that/those to indicate distance. You would not say "this apple" to talk about the one that is very much farther away. "This apple" is the closer apple. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:04, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lost

The article previously said something like this:

The word that is used in the formation of the restrictive relative clause, especially one identification. These words are used to modify an adjective, a noun, and a pronoun, to specify information about a subject or object.

cited to https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/that

I don't think this is needed, but if someone disagrees, please feel free to restore it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:00, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is "that" a very common word?

Like I said before, "that" is a very common word in the English language. Does anybody knows the question, "Is "that" a very common word?" ExpandD2003 (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Schwede66 (talk) 19:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

5x expanded by Urve (talk). Self-nominated at 12:35, 26 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Urve: I just had to review this one because its such a creative and a bit wacky of a hook idea, and I totally agree with Schwede66 that it is really good. I was talking with my friend and then just thought, screw it, I have to give it a shot. Assuming good faith on the offline sources cited within the article proper with no discernible issues, of proper length and submission date. The sole major concern I have is that the hook isn't cited, which is difficult when the hook is a single word in itself, and thus would be nearly impossible to cite. Apart from that I think it should be totally set. I'm a bit of a new reviewer so I can't really say for sure if there's a policy which addresses this in special circumstances, which is why I want to get a second opinion on this. Perhaps @Theleekycauldron: can give it a glance if they're able to? Ornithoptera (talk) 08:19, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am but biased and blinded by the glory of this wonderful hook :) in all seriousness, it should be excellent and I absolutely cannot wait for its run. I'll have to let someone else promote since I'm going to formally sign off on this thing, though. Also, I'm going to third Schwede66's congrats on writing this because that absolutely cannot have been easy. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:21, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To Prep4
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:That&oldid=1059189097"