<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: That/Which Drives Me Nuts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/04/03/thatwhich-drives-me-nuts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/04/03/thatwhich-drives-me-nuts/</link>
	<description>Appellate Attorney Greg May on Practice and Developments in the Appellate Courts of California</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:33:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: A Hunger for Grammar Guidance? &#124; The California Blog of Appeal</title>
		<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/04/03/thatwhich-drives-me-nuts/comment-page-1/#comment-1454</link>
		<dc:creator>A Hunger for Grammar Guidance? &#124; The California Blog of Appeal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:32:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=661#comment-1454</guid>
		<description>[...] That/Which Drives Me Nuts  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] That/Which Drives Me Nuts  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Who Thinks that Contractions Shouldn&#8217;t Should Not Be Used in Appellate Briefs or Other Legal Writing? &#124; The California Blog of Appeal</title>
		<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/04/03/thatwhich-drives-me-nuts/comment-page-1/#comment-1436</link>
		<dc:creator>Who Thinks that Contractions Shouldn&#8217;t Should Not Be Used in Appellate Briefs or Other Legal Writing? &#124; The California Blog of Appeal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 23:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=661#comment-1436</guid>
		<description>[...] That/Which Drives Me Nuts  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] That/Which Drives Me Nuts  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Lenard</title>
		<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/04/03/thatwhich-drives-me-nuts/comment-page-1/#comment-1433</link>
		<dc:creator>George Lenard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 21:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=661#comment-1433</guid>
		<description>I think I&#039;ve finally nailed this rule, &lt;strong&gt;which&lt;/strong&gt; troubled me for a long time.  Much confusion is caused by its counterintuitive aspect: &quot;that&quot; is used when one is explaining &quot;which one.&quot;  &lt;strong&gt;Which&lt;/strong&gt; rule troubled me for so long?  The one &lt;strong&gt;that &lt;/strong&gt;explains proper use of &quot;that&quot; and &quot;which,&quot; &lt;strong&gt;which many others find difficult as well.&lt;/strong&gt;  Just remember this: if the clause answers the question &quot;which one,&quot; don&#039;t use &quot;which,&quot; use &quot;that&quot;! (I think.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I&#8217;ve finally nailed this rule, <strong>which</strong> troubled me for a long time.  Much confusion is caused by its counterintuitive aspect: &#8220;that&#8221; is used when one is explaining &#8220;which one.&#8221;  <strong>Which</strong> rule troubled me for so long?  The one <strong>that </strong>explains proper use of &#8220;that&#8221; and &#8220;which,&#8221; <strong>which many others find difficult as well.</strong>  Just remember this: if the clause answers the question &#8220;which one,&#8221; don&#8217;t use &#8220;which,&#8221; use &#8220;that&#8221;! (I think.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
