Relative clauses: non-defining relative clauses

Do you know how to give extra information about someone or something using relative clauses? Test what you know with interactive exercises and read the explanation to help you.

Look at these examples to see how non-defining relative clauses are used.

Jack, who's retired now, spends a lot of time with his grandchildren.
We want to see the new Tom Carter film, which was released on Friday.
My sister, whose dog I'm looking after, is visiting a friend in Australia.

Try this exercise to test your grammar.

Grammar test 1: Grammar B1–B2: Relative clauses – non-defining relative clauses: 1

Read the explanation to learn more.

Grammar explanation

Relative clauses give us information about the person or thing mentioned.

Non-defining relative clauses give us extra information about someone or something. It isn't essential for understanding who or what we are talking about.

My grandfather, who's 87, goes swimming every day.
The house, which was built in 1883, has just been opened to the public.
The award was given to Sara, whose short story impressed the judges.

We always use a relative pronoun or adverb to start a non-defining relative clause: who, which, whose, when or where (but not that). We also use commas to separate the clause from the rest of the sentence.

***who, which* and *whose***

We can use who to talk about people, which to talk about things and whose to refer to the person or thing that something belongs to.

Yesterday I met my new boss, who was very nice.
The house, which is very big, is also very cold!
My next-door neighbour, whose children go to school with ours, has just bought a new car.
After the port there is a row of fishermen's houses, whose lights can be seen from across the bay.

Places and times

We can use which with a preposition to talk about places and times. In these cases it's more common to use where or when instead of which and the preposition.

City Park, which we used to go to, has been closed down.
City Park, where we used to go, has been closed down.
December, which Christmas is celebrated in, is a summer month for the southern hemisphere.
December, when Christmas is celebrated, is a summer month for the southern hemisphere.

However, when we use which without a preposition, we can't use where or when.

Centre Park, which we love, is always really busy on Saturdays.
February, which is my favourite month, lasts 29 days this year.

Do this exercise to test your grammar again.

Grammar test 2: Grammar B1–B2: Relative clauses – non-defining relative clauses: 2

Try another grammar lesson

Language level

B1 Intermediate

Hello, I am confused about this notion. I hope you can help me ^^.

I was taught in school that we can drop the "relative clause" in "non-defining clauses".

For example: My bicycle, (which I've had for more than ten years), is falling apart.

I was taught that the phrase "which I've had for more than ten years" is additional information. Without it, the sentence still makes sense.

However, I've searched this notion recently and found out that we cannot drop the "relative clause" since it makes sentences more cohesive and clear.

please help me with this one. Thank you ^^

Hello Micheallll,

In your example, removing the relative clause does not change the essential meaning of the sentence. It removes some information which certainly makes the sentence more colourful and interesting but it does not remove or change the meaning.

Defining relative clauses, also called restrictive relative clauses, limit or identify the noun they are describing. In other words they tell us which item we are talking about. You can see the difference by removing the commas:

With the commas it is a non-defining relative clause which simply adds extra information:

My bicycle, which I've had for more than ten years, is falling apart.

I have one bicycle and it is falling apart.

With the commas it provides information allowing us to identify which bicycle we are talking about:

My bicycle which I've had for more than ten years is falling apart.

I have more than one bicycle and the one which is falling apart is the one which I've had for more than ten years.

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team

In some sentences, we can see "in which" or "to which", what role does which play in these places?

Hello graceis,

It's possible to replace relative adverbs such as where or when with a relative pronoun (which) and a preposition. For example:

That's the house where I grew up.
That's the house in which I grew up.
It was a period when I was rather lonely.
It was a period during which I was rather lonely.

You can also use to + relative pronoun as an alternative to putting the preposition at the end of the sentence:

Which book did you ask for?
For which book did you ask?
She's the woman that/who I gave it to.
She's the woman to whom I gave it.

Generally we prefer who to whom in modern English but we always use whom when there is a preposition before it.

Using a relative pronoun with a preposition is less common in everyday speech and can be quite formal in style.

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team

Why sentence”The author of the book, Kathleen Millet, was born in Germany.” is a non-defining sentence, and Kathleen Millet is the non-defining noun phrases?

Hello Ivyxoxo,

The phrase 'Kathleen Millet' is not a relative clause but rather is an example of an appositive noun phrase. Appositive noun phrases are used when we want to provide an alternative name for something. For example:

Joanne, my sister, just sent me a text.

Here, the phrase 'my sister' is an appositive noun phrase renaming the subject 'Joanne'. It's a common way of adding extra information or clarifying the identity of something referred to in a sentence. In your example, 'Kathleen Millet' is an appositive noun phrase renaming/clarifying the subject of the sentence 'The author of the book'.

You can read more about appositive noun phrases here:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/apposition

https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/what-are-appositives-appositive-phrases

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team

I realized that I had failed to copy the original clause word for word.
Correction to the part in parentheses: (as in "an annual foreign policy address to diplomats accredited to the Holy See, which traditionally serves as a lament ...")
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/08/world/europe/pope-francis-surrogacy-…

Hi Sefika,

Yes, you can rewrite the clause as a non-defining one. It changes the meaning, however.

an annual foreign policy address which traditionally serves as a lament for all the world’s conflicts and injustices - with a defining relative clause, the writer sees the bold part as integral to the noun, annual foreign policy address. The main idea of the sentence is the noun foreign policy address and the bold words together.
an annual foreign policy address, which traditionally serves as a lament for all the world’s conflicts and injustices - with a non-defining relative clause, the writer sees the bold part as additional information, related to the main idea of the sentence but not integral to it, and therefore of secondary importance. The main idea is simply an annual foreign policy address (a less specific main idea than in the sentence with the defining relative clause).

So they are both correct, but differ in what the writer considers to be the main idea and what they consider to be additional/secondary information. I hope that helps to make sense of it.

Jonathan

LearnEnglish team

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I agree with you, but I thought that the info. in the relative clause was already definite ("an annual foreign policy address" and "traditionally ...": such an address would normally be about the world's conflicts and injustices); therefore, it could be given parenthetically, i.e., by using a non-defining relative clause instead of a defining one. The writer must have thought differently.

Hello.
I have a question about the relative clause below:
"The pope’s remark came during an annual foreign policy address to diplomats accredited to the Holy See that* traditionally serves as a lament for all the world’s conflicts and injustices." (From a New York Times article (Jan. 8, 2024))
*At first, the relative pronoun was "which", but then they replaced it with "that", which is preferred in defining relative clauses over "which" in American English.
My question is whether that relative clause could be rewritten as a non-defining one (as in "... an address to foreign diplomats accredited to the Holy See, which traditionally serves as a lament ...")?
Thank you for your help in advance.