0

I've never heard the following participial phrase, and it sounds unnatural to me:

Instead of

"There is no way that you are so tall."

one would write

"There is no way you being so tall."

I mean that "that" implies a relative clause: is that correct?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

No, that is not grammatical.

It is not true that that implies a relative clause. It can introduce a relative clause, but here it is a complement clause.

It might look like a relative clause because it appears to qualify the noun way, and in anothe context (where way is being used literally) it could do so:

That's the way [that] leads home the quickest.

where it answers the question "which way?"

But in your example sentence, even leaving aside the fact that no way is an idiom which cannot be analysed, "that you are so tall" is not in any sense an answer to the question "which way?"

Improve this answer
3
  • 1
    'There is no way [that] something is the case ' can be a casual conversational way of expressing surprise by pretended disbelief. 'There is no way you are so tall' sounds like something an adult might say to a child they haven't seen for a while. A modern version of 'My, how you've grown!'
    – Michael Harvey
    Aug 14, 2022 at 22:00
  • Thank you very much. Do you have any source that shows how to identify relativ clauses?
    – Hans Mustermann
    Aug 14, 2022 at 22:14
  • I'm afraid I don't know the sources. But I suspect that it is always going to involve some heuristics. I'm pretty sure you could come up with a sentence where the a clause could be either a relative or not, depending on context.
    – Colin Fine
    Aug 15, 2022 at 12:54

You must log in to answer this question.

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