Omitting the word that

I think «rules» 1 and 2 are red herrings. They don’t have anything to do with whether that can be omitted.

But rule 3 usually does work. That is normally

not

omitted when it is a

subject

relative pronoun, but I think there are exceptions. That normally

can

be omitted when it is an

object

relative pronoun, provided it does not complicate understanding of the sentence.

When that is a subordinating conjunction, playing no role within its own clause, it can usually be omitted, but there are exceptions to this too.

Examples:

0. He thinks (that) he is entitled to be served like a king by his wife. [Better without that]
1. My data on newlywed couples indicate (that) more husbands are being transformed. [Better with that]
2. He may not emote (in) the same way (that) his wife does, but he will learn how to better connect with her emotionally. [Better without that]
3. As he does so, he’ll make choices that show he honors her. [Requires that]
4. This doesn’t mean (that) he is superior to other men in personality,…. [Probably better without that]
5. He has simply figured out something very important about being married (that) the others haven’t yet. [Best with that]
6. Research shows (that) a husband who can accept influence from his wife also tends to be an outstanding father. [Better with that]
7. The consequence is (that) no one will much care about him when he lives nor mourn him when he dies. [Best with that, without it use a colon]

Here are two of my own that show that sometimes we

must

omit the subordinating conjunction that:

Who do you really think (that) you are? [Best without that, but not wrong with]
Who do you think was calling you? [Wrong with that, because the subject of was is who]

Omitting that is acceptable in this context; a more detailed description of when that may be omitted is available at your later question, When can I remove the word ‘that’ in a sentence?.

As to the suggestion “don’t use ‘that’ frequently in writing and try to avoid it wherever possible”—this is an overstated and under-nuanced version of what is actually very sound practical advice: be careful of how and when and how often you use this overworked word.

That has five distinct uses in English:

1. As a demonstrative pronoun: That’s the man I saw!
2. As a demonstrative adjective (determiner): I saw that man!
3. As a relative pronoun (relativizer): He’s the man that I saw.
4. As a subordinating conjunction (subordinator): I told you that I saw him.
5. As an adverb: The man was about that tall.

That’s a lot of uses; and they’re all very common, so it’s very easy to use that repeatedly without noticing. It’s even possible to stack four thats in a row, in four different senses, without being grammatically ‘incorrect’:

I told you that₄ that₁ that₃ that₂ man said was totally false.

That’s hard to parse; and even though you’re unlikely to produce anything that awkward (I had to work hard to produce that), you still want to be careful not to confuse the reader even momentarily by using too many thats. It’s bad practice to use any word in two different senses in the same short passage; and this is particularly dangerous with that, because one of its uses (4) is to distinguish major syntactic units.

So be careful with your thats. Repetition of that in the same sense is OK, because it can establish rhetorically useful parallels; but if you notice you’re using it in different senses, look for ways to paraphrase. Here are a few:

• You may omit many conjunctive₄ and relative₃
  thats (see the link).
• You may always substitute who or which for relative₃
  that.
• You may often replace a demonstrative pronoun₁ with a personal pronoun or with what.
• You may sometimes replace the demonstrative adjective₂ with this, or the adverb₅ with this or so.

And so forth. Don’t avoid using that—that’s just silly. But do avoid using that confusingly.

A piece of bossy advice often given to creative writers is to sweep through your manuscripts before you submit them and delete certain words. “Just,” “so,” “very,” and “really” vie for the top target, but the most popular prohibition of all might be of the word “that.”

What’s wrong with “that”?

Nothing is wrong with the word “that.” It’s frequently essential to the grammar or clarity of a sentence (see below). Yet we’re often told [that] it’s “unneeded.” I sense the ghosts of Strunk and White here. “Omit needless words,” they tell us, declaring (for instance) that the sentence “His story is strange” is “more vigorous” than “His story is a strange one” and therefore better.

But is vigorous always better? Do readers demand vigor at all times, from every sentence? Creative writers especially must ask, Is this character or narration meant to be vigorous?

It’s interesting that Strunk and White do not include “that” in their examples of needless words. In fact they use it repeatedly in their own advice on omitting needless words: “This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short . . . but that every word tell” (The Elements of Style, 3rd ed. [New York: Macmillan, 1979], p. 23). Clearly, Strunk and White believed that “that” has the power to tell.

Picture an aged, rasping storyteller surrounded by curious listeners. The storyteller begins. Pick one:

“It is strange, the tale that he told.”

“It’s strange, the tale he told.”

“His story is strange.”

No matter which version you like best, it’s a valid exercise. The writer chooses. What if the character is a beat cop instead of a mysterious storyteller? Most of us would rather base our choice on how the character or narrator speaks than on a dubious rule. We listen to the sentence and choose what fits: vigor, musicality, a dreamy formality.

The problem with labeling any word as “needless” is that sometimes it’s the best word possible. In the sentences above, I used it four times, quoted it twice (not counting the storyteller example or when I referred to it as a word), and chose to omit it once. Would you have made different choices? How to decide?

When “that” can go

I won’t deny that “that” sometimes gets in the way of a good sentence. Newspaper editors who like to save ink are expert deleters of “that.” As the AP Stylebook advises (in its entry on “that” as a conjunction), “That usually may be omitted when a dependent clause immediately follows a form of the verb to say: The president said he had signed the bill.” Creative writers aiming for briskness can take the hint:

Leave “that” out if it slows down the action,

He turned so quickly [that] he knocked the table over.

if a repetition bothers you,

That’s the real one? Everyone believed [that] that one was fake!

if it bogs down snappy dialogue,

“The key [that] I saw is in his pocket!”

or if you simply don’t like it.

She turned the cake so [that] the hole in the side was hidden.

On the other hand

There are times when a well-placed “that” prevents the reader from getting the wrong idea. The AP Stylebook is clear on this: “Use the conjunction that to introduce a dependent clause if the sentence sounds or looks awkward without it. There are no hard-and-fast rules.” And further: “When in doubt, include that. Omission can hurt. Inclusion never does.”

Fiction writers encounter the same dangers as journalists if they omit “that” when it’s needed for clarity. Leave “that” in when it begins a subordinate clause after a conjunction like “after,” “although,” or “in addition to”:

She said that in addition to the wallet, she had found two rings and a small pocketknife.

Retain it after verbs like “believe,” “declare,” and “see”:

They can see that specially planted trees in the fields across the river will provide a perfect cover for the lord’s longbowmen. [“That” prevents us from reading “They can see trees.”]

And keep it when a dependent clause starts with an element of time:

He swore that on the afternoon of the crime he was visiting his sick mother. [Otherwise we don’t know whether he swore on that day or visited his mother on that day.]

Conclusion

Like much advice for writers, the campaign to eradicate “that” from our sentences comes from pushing a reasonable caution too far. There are times when trimming is in order. But a better guideline might be simply to keep an eye on your use of “that.”

Photo modified from Deletion Warning by FindYourSearch, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

Fiction+ posts at Shop Talk reflect the opinions of its authors and not necessarily those of The Chicago Manual of Style or the University of Chicago Press.

~ ~ ~

Carol Saller’s books include The Subversive Copy Editor and the young adult novel Eddie’s War. You can find Carol online at Twitter (@SubvCopyEd) and at Writer, Editor, Helper.

Sign up for Carol’s email updates.

Please see our commenting policy.