I stumbled upon a website with the following paragraph:

MBIE has launched an investigation into claims Chinese galvanised steel coil imports have been dumped on the local market, causing "material injury" to New Zealand industry, and the case will end up on the table of newly appointed Commerce Minister Jacqui Dean.

I thought that sentence was grammatically wrong because the author should put the word "that" (as a conjunction) right after the word "claim". I don't see why the author could drop the conjunction. Is this a prevailing phenomenon in American or Australian English?

  • 5
    No, it applies to all dialects. The subordinator is optional here (as it is with most (but not all) content clauses). It is more likely to be omitted in informal than in formal style.
    – BillJ
    Mar 2, 2017 at 8:21

1 Answer 1


It's not uncommon to omit "that" as a conjunction where it is implied.

She suddenly remembered (that) she was late for an appointment.

Over there is the picture (that) he gave me many years ago.

That is not the answer (that) I was looking for.

As BillJ says in his comment, this is found to all dialects. It might be an artifact of the more "relaxed" style in modern English, where we tend to omit words which aren't entirely necessary.

  • In your last two sentences that is a relative pronoun, not a conjunction.
    – None
    Oct 17, 2023 at 14:02

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .