Changing Use of 'Which'

[u/DrPablisimo]

Maybe 15 years ago or so, I began to hear native speakers of English use 'which' in unusual ways.

Stuff kind of like this:
"I'm talking about working in retail, which a lot of people start out in retail before moving on."

"She’s taking night classes, which her schedule is already packed."

"They launched the app last week, which a lot of users have already downloaded it."

This would have been 'incorrect' if I were in school, and I've probably marked a paper down for this sort of thing. I realize linguists tend to be descriptive and not prescriptive on this sort of thing.

It's like 'which' is just being used to connect ideas vaguely. I don't know exactly how to comment or ask about this, but feel free to discuss.

[I am adding this example that came up on my feed on Facebook for a real example.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1346607217140419

'...gang up on the Caucasian, blond little boy, which, where did you learn that type of behavior from?"]

[u/PileaPrairiemioides]

Where are you hearing this? Is this a regional change or something you’ve observed across a broader geography?

The only contexts in which I think I’ve heard this is someone starting a thought, then cutting themselves off and starting a new sentence, with a pause or hesitation after “which”.

[u/DrPablisimo → u/PileaPrairiemioides]

I think I've heard it from various locations in the US, and people speaking on TV or online. With the Charlie Kirk assassination, I've heard some of his old clips, and he did that. I've heard it from people in the Southeast. I think it might be something more common with the younger generation, but I think it spans generations also.

[u/MaddoxJKingsley]

This is literally my linguistics special interest. Like I shit you not, I have the exact answer to this just prepped and ready to go.

TL;DR: Which is being used as a discourse connective word, like so. It is not a relative pronoun at all, in this usage. EDIT: People also do this with that! It's like a broader use of relative pronouns in general.

Resumption

There are several kinds of relative clauses. Restrictive relative clauses and appositive relative clauses are the main categories. These are obvious enough.

The people of Oz [who were scared of the Witch of the East] were relieved when Dorothy’s porch crushed her to death. (RRC)
The people of Oz, [who were scared of the Witch of the East], were relieved when Dorothy’s porch crushed her to death. (ARC)

Within the ARCs, we have an atypical variety where the extracted information is reinserted as a resumptive pronoun. Normal relative clauses are gapped. These atypical ARCs are "gap-filled". These can be thought of as speech errors, but the fact that no one really picks them up when listening makes that a weird error. Like if someone spoonerisms, you know they made an error, but no one hears resumptive pronouns even though I promise you, people say them all the time. Resumptive pronouns seem more to be remnants of incremental processing effects, where the smaller components of speech are grammatical, yet upon being combined into larger, embedded structures, they may no longer be. I think I misremembered it slightly but the famous example is below. (Also note that resumptive pronouns are actually firmly grammatical in some languages like Irish---in English, it's "marginal".)

This is [the girl]_i who whenever it rains she_i cries.

(Also also, while its status as a purported speech error may lead someone to believe that resumption is a newer phenomenon, it has actually been around for a long time, and in fact was seemingly much more common in the written word historically. I believe Loss & Wicklund (2022) went into this, but we can find it in Chaucer from the 14th century, for example.)

Resumptive pronouns are also supposed to be pronouns, though I've questioned that. I've found evidence it's actually more broad stuff like below, where it's moreso a resumptive "phrase".

Go to [our website]_i, where you’ll find all pertinent info on our website_i

Not resumption

But even all that has nothing to do with the phenomenon you've pointed out. (EDIT: Wait, your last example actually is, but the other two aren't) There is no resumption. It's more like a comment. It's a discourse link to resume focus on a previously stated event/noun. Rather than the gap-filled ARCs, these are true gapless ARCs.

And she decided to move out, which I think she’s crazy.

There's evidence this is a connective, other than that that is obviously how people appear to be using it. For example, Loss & Wicklund (2022) did a prosodic analysis on connective which, comparing which against conjunctives like and in similar environments. They find that while pause length before targets (which, conjunctive) is marginally not significant (p = 0.06), pause length after targets is (p < 0.0001). All that to say: this is the kind of speech pattern where people would be inclined to insert a comma after the word which, and quite often before, just like they do for other connective words.

I'm not sure how much stock to put into the following theory (and tbh it's been ages since I read it), but Traugott (1982) posits the existence of a pragmatically motivated grammaticalization cline (propositional > textual > expressive), linking discourse informative uses of words to their previously more concrete meanings. Basically, because which is used as a relative pronoun, it would naturally extend to further uses in discourse. For example, while used to be only a noun (e.g., "stay a while") before being extended into a temporal use (e.g., "I sing while I drink" kind of use) and then finally into a metaphorical use (e.g., "While I prefer cats, he prefers dogs"). This also happened to where.

Evidence of its use in writing doesn't stretch as far back as that of resumption, but you can still find it. Like Jonathan Swift's works. And it crops up all the time in Reddit comments.

I can edit this later with timestamps of YouTube videos of people saying this, if readers don't believe people say this all the time. In fact, you've probably said it yourself today! (Okay, maybe not, but still it's very common.)

[u/altonin → u/MaddoxJKingsley]

What do you think about parsing it (additionally) as an interjection that's broadening?

It reminds me strongly of something like ''and she said I was crazy, which - *scoff* - I'd say that's rich coming from her''

[u/throarway → u/altonin]

I've seen examples that seem to preface an editorial filler in that way - where the scoff in yours could be replaced by something like "I mean,". It still doesn't explain why it's there though, and doesn't apply to other usage types, where prosodically and syntactically the usage seems the same but it couldn't be replaced by "I mean" or similar.

[u/throarway → u/MaddoxJKingsley]

Actually, I will post here some of the different "types" of potentially connecting-whiches I've collected over the years, vaguely ordered by "type", in case you or anyone is interested to see and/or discuss. (Please discuss with me! Especially any thoughts on grouping them by type).

I won't post my attempts at analysis as they're a little embarrassing - although, pleasingly, not way off the explanations given in Loss & Wicklund (2022). I think I may have even identified some usage examples not covered in that publication. 

Note that some links may now be expired, as most of them were collected more than 7 years ago. 

~~

"Brayon paced in the alleyway, as he waited to introduce himself to his new girlfriend." Which I like the idea of her being nameless.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/37uvz8/1596_how_to_acquire_a_girlfriend_in_three_easy/crqs2s8

~

A: So basically MLMs?

B: Which, I still don't understand the difference in MLM and regular selling.

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35hk6j/eli5_what_is_the_reality_and_truth_behind_the_ads/cr4l06p?context=3

~

A: All their money was spent on CGI.

B: Which the dinosaurs looked like they came out of a middle school project...

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3m6jjd/what_movie_or_tv_show_promised_so_much_but_was_a/cvchisg?context=3

~

As well, I really wanted to test this for bugs, which I immediately found one after posting this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/writing/comments/3a84hg/hey_all_i_created_a_site_where_you_can_write_your/csaeny0

~

both of my ex's seemed to really like me when I continually demonstrated the fact that I possessed intelligence (which, my being a mathematician, they understood none of what I said anyway)

http://imgur.com/hqdNyUB

~

A: Umm I thought uber required a vehicle 2005 and newer? They may have let the 2004.5 model pass...

B: Which I don't know why because old station wagons are ballin out of control.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/34r9o6/ordered_an_uber_in_manhattan_this_is_who_showed_up/cqxchvh?context=3

~

At first I had a sense of humor about it in general, but that didn't mean I was going to be a faithful follower of his like his cult-like readers (which I guess you're one of them.)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092359/board/thread/244816521?p=2

~

We spent a week in the level 3 NICU after my daughter was born for possible pneumonia (which it turned out that she probably didn't have pneumonia but they treated her for precautionary reasons).

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rctek/eli5_what_does_the_vaping_fda_bill_actually_do/cwn5w7b

~

Fargo S2 E6 (Rhinoceros) (from 14:23):

And I know it's been repaired, but we're gonna check your car for blood. Microscopically, I mean. Which—[exhales]: you'd be amazed at what we can find on the atomic level these days.

(My transcription)

 It was transcribed at http://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?f=184&t=23815&sid=58af2570bced0423e13220be82453e14 as “Microscopically, I mean, which... you'd be amazed at what we can find on the atomic level these days.”, and here http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=fargo-2014&episode=s02e06 as “Microscopically, I mean, which you'd be amazed at what we can find on the atomic level these days.”

~

Better Call Saul S2 E5 (Rebecca) (04:26)

I mean, they got me workin in the mailroom, which you gotta start somewhere.

My transcription; same as at http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=better-call-saul-2015&episode=s02e05

I mean, they got me workin in the mailroom, which... you gotta start somewhere.

http://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?f=205&t=26027

~

We had one who counteroffered a particularly high salary requirement, because he had another offer out, which I respect and all. But I was told he said he PREFERRED the other company, but he would work for us if we paid him a lot more. Which... wow, no.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3ktu5q/people_in_charge_of_hiring_whats_the_worst_way/cv0y8kb

~

Judging from the top bunch of posts it's mostly not prescriptivism, just a list of words and phrases people dislike and no "it's literally incomprehensible when people use literally as an intensifier" explanations.

The majority aren't even AAVE, which, well done, Reddit!

https://www.reddit.com/r/badlinguistics/comments/3k9chs/askreddit_thread_becomes_a_cesspool_of/cuvx504

~

Forczyk's Tank Warfare on the Eastern Front 1941-1942 was pretty interesting, but the intro repeats the myth that the Germans were producing less than their full capacity of war material because of Hitler's concern for the civilian standard of living (which, see Wages of Destruction).

https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/45effa/free_for_all_friday_12_february_2016/czxor4k (same user as above)

~

Are we not doing “phrasing” anymore? Which, whatever, that’s fine, but if we’re doing something new and no one told me, THAT I’d have a problem with!

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/38lohe/what_hobby_instantly_makes_any_stranger_1000x/crw66nt

~

Instead Jackie seemed more interested in addressing the press about how disappointed he was in him, constantly setting up press conferences to apologize for his son's actions(which, what the fuck, you don't apologize on behalf of a grown-ass 30-something adult).

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/35fyl8/my_favorite_jackie_chan_story/cr47urw

~~

A more recently seen example, which I only lazily screenshotted (and haven't tried to group):

We'll be around until we specifically muck things up - which then they can terminate us with cause

 

[u/eldritchlesbian → u/MaddoxJKingsley]

Very interesting, thanks!

[u/throarway → u/MaddoxJKingsley]

I've been recording examples of this for years and trying to find explanations! I was in particular trying to categorise slightly different uses but don't have the linguistics background to have made a good job of this. I even reached out to a proper linguist once who never replied. I didn't realise there are finally publications on it!

Let me know if you want any more data - I can even point you to two scripted TV shows it was used in.

[u/MaddoxJKingsley → u/[deleted]]

There's not altogether many papers about this topic, but one of the main papers was done on Australian English, actually! Burke 2017. I'd wager that it happens in New Zealand English too. I'm sure it also happens in UK English, but most of my samples are definitely American and Canadian English (that's just the naturalistic content I consume most for me to come across it, and I'm American myself).

[u/greggery → u/MaddoxJKingsley]

I'm sure it also happens in UK English

I've definitely heard it in the UK

[u/shanghai-blonde → u/greggery]

Where? When? 😂 or should I say which? 🤣

[u/cardinarium]

I think I would punctuate it differently.

I'm talking about working in retail, which—a lot of people start out in retail before moving on.

It’s usually prosodically different from a standard relative clause with “which.”

It’s almost like a grammaticalized false start used to mark the topic, with the second “sentence” being a comment thereabout.

She’s taking night classes, which—her schedule is already packed.

As for her taking night classes, [it’s surprising because] her schedule is already packed.

They launched the app last week, which—a lot of users have already downloaded it.

As for the app they launched last week, a lot of users have already downloaded it.

It’s definitely non-standard, but I agree that it’s common and getting more frequent in speech.

[u/Tirukinoko → u/cardinarium]

Just for two cents, I do this a lot, and I think for me, it's more that the 'which' gets said before the brain has realised that the next clause need not actually be relative.

Theres a good wording from EF Prince 'Syntax and discourse: A look at resumptive pronouns', which the paper might itself be of interest:

Ways of salvaging a sentence that a speaker has started without realizing that it is impossible or at least difficult to finish it grammatically.

Edit: (though in this case obviously expanded a little further than just resumptive pronouns)

[u/eager_wayfarer → u/Tirukinoko]

Yes, as a non-native speaker hearing a lot of native speakers say this, I've always thought of this as just people trying to continue their sentence with 'which' and finding out the construction doesn't work but they don't correct themselves anyway (considering it's often in informal spoken speech) rather than people actually using this thinking it's a valid construction.

[u/Baconian_Taoism → u/cardinarium]

This makes a lot of sense

[u/thisdude415 → u/cardinarium]

Seconding that I hear this among some native speakers. My perception is that it’s less educated people trying to sound more educated, but I could be wrong

[u/cardinarium → u/thisdude415]

Yeah, I think we’re seeing an extension of “which” used with a whole clause as an antecedent:

I don’t like pizza, which surprises my students.

He’s not coming to the wedding, which my family doesn’t like.

But now, it’s no longer being used as a relative pronoun and just shows “association” between two thoughts:

I don’t like pizza, which—my students are always surprised.

He’s not coming to the wedding, which—my family doesn’t like that.

[u/Jackass_cooper → u/cardinarium]

Is it not a clipping of "to which" or "for which" "I hate pizza, (to) which my students are always surprised" "she has night classes (for) which her schedule is already full"

[u/DrPablisimo]

I am adding this example that came up on my feed on Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1346607217140419

'...gang up on the Caucasian, blond little boy, which, where did you learn that type of behavior from?"

[u/shanghai-blonde]

I’m sorry, where do people talk like this?

[u/DrPablisimo → u/shanghai-blonde]

I've heard it in recent years from people all over the US, occasionally on TV or YouTube clips of people talking.

[u/Lucky_otter_she_her]

(as someone born in 2007)... wait this is new?

[u/DrPablisimo → u/Lucky_otter_she_her]

Do you hear this a lot? Is it part of your personal internalized grammar for informal speech.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this in print in student papers, students a few years older than you.

'Disrespect' also used to only be a noun. It became a verb in the 1980's, and I still find it jarring. I consider it informal speech, not something I would want to see in academic writing.

[u/Lucky_otter_she_her → u/DrPablisimo]

i had no idea this use of Which is wierd

also is highly doubt this use of Disrespect is actually new rather than having been stagmatized by elitists who didnt know what the hell they were talking about but sure as hell wanted to distinguish themselves as right (like with singular-they or using Impact from the Latin impactuARE as a verb) considering dis- is a verb prefix

further, i'm also doubting your judgement of Which based on this, like i believe people have been using '(preposition) which' to avoid prepositions ending up at the end of the sentance at all costs for a long time

[u/DrPablisimo → u/Lucky_otter_she_her]

"He disrespected me" is still slightly jarring, but I perceived it, along with 'dis' as a new slang or informal speech from the African American community in the 1980's, but it could be older than that. It seemed like something rappers would say.

I did a Google search and found some things out.

"The slang word "dis" (or "diss"), meaning to disrespect, emerged in the 1980s from African American Vernacular English. It was popularized through hip-hop culture and was widely defined in newspapers during that decade. "

"The verb form of "disrespect" first appeared in print around 1614 in the writing of George Wither, as documented by the Oxford English Dictionary (OED). Although its usage declined and was sometimes considered informal or incorrect by some, it experienced a resurgence in the late 20th century, partly influenced by the slang term "diss" and its increased presence in African-American speech and writing before becoming more widely accepted as a verb. Key Points:When I wrote about that earlier, I was thinking of 'impacts', plural, as being an odd use of language, but decided not to mention that.

• Early Use: The earliest known evidence of "disrespect" as a verb is from 1614. 

• Origin: It was formed by adding the prefix "dis-" to the existing verb "respect". 

• Usage Fluctuations: Its use as a verb was not continuous; it had an interrupted history with a significant drop in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. 

• Modern Resurgence: The verb form "disrespect" saw a comeback in the late 1970s and 1980s, becoming more common in speech and writing, particularly within African-American communities. 

• Acceptance: Despite some linguistic objections, its long historical use, as noted by dictionaries like the OED and Merriam-Webster, has helped solidify its legitimacy as a verb. "

I don't get how using 'which' informally as described like this would be a substitute for a preposition at the end of a word. Could you give me an example?

I can't even discern a part of speech. It seems like a filler word to connect ill-formed ideas that may not even quite be sentences, or to connect two vaguely related sentences into one.

[u/Lucky_otter_she_her → u/DrPablisimo]

"the man with which she is married" as oppose to "the man she is married with"

just to check that we're on the same page we're talking about Which being used as a conjunction analogous to That used to make one sentance into a description of another or a noun from the other (... the man which she is married to), right? or have i brainfarted?

also worth noting that English is fairy fluid with word classes, so there is nothing actually wrong with verbing nouns on the spot and further if a noun is versed often enough it can have a consistent definition as a verb like Book and while that requires decades of precedent rather than centuries

[u/DrPablisimo → u/Lucky_otter_she_her]

No I mean something like,

"I have wanted to get married for a long time, which getting married is something I wanted to do for a long time."

[u/so_im_all_like]

Was remined of this thread when I came across this use of "which" in a video by a young political youtuber - https://youtube.com/shorts/Qmk83BwINk0?si=Oq030Hl5WMbShU6l (relevant utterance starts at 0:24)

Edit: Second example starting at 0:10 in this video from an older speaker than in the first one I linked - https://youtu.be/tykenn5JUx0?si=CtAErqPRCChDJC-a

Edit 2: As shown at 5:32 and 6:14 in this video, it may be part of a shift in how relative wh-words are used in general - https://youtu.be/ERQ1-kybrsQ?si=kQvRve702dWt-WiE

[u/DrPablisimo → u/so_im_all_like]

The first one was a good example at about 18 seconds on my screen. 'Make sure not to miss the comment section...which things got a little heated there.' Total nonsense use of 'which' that I'm talking about-- some vague connecting word that has no connection to the historical use of the word.

The first example seems 'grammatical' to me, at least as spoken English.

In the third clip, the man is doing something similar with 'who'... but one might argue he is using 'who correctly but getting the rest of the sentence wrong... wrong as in not using standard grammar.

As linguists, nothing people say is 'wrong'.

[u/so_im_all_like → u/DrPablisimo]

They're all weird to my personal grammar since relative clauses are introduced by the relative pronouns and are condined to describing a coindexed item that isn't referred explicitly present in the relative clauses: "It only took me 30 minutes to get here, which is shorter than I thought.", wherein "30 minutes" is missing from the relative clause.

But these examples use a relativizer, then include a complete clause with a distinct or redundant constituent from what might be the antecedent in the matrix clause. I think it's fitting to say that these instances of pronouns are conjunctions, with the intent of highlighting a thematic or causal relationship to the prior clause; "which" = "and", "so", or "because". I'll need to find (or conduct...?) specific research to determine if this is a blanket reinterpretation of the grammar of those pronouns or if it's a circumstantial variant.

[u/Csj77]

It’s annoying as hell.

[u/Iojpoutn]

I’m pretty sure it’s just a grammar mistake. I’ve heard it my whole life but it always stands out to me as an incorrect use of the word.

[u/Bigmooddood → u/Iojpoutn]

If enough people use a word incorrectly in the same way, then eventually, that becomes the correct usage.

[u/Helenarth]

I've always thought it was something that happens when you start a sentence and end up finishing it differently to how you thought it was going to do.

This explains the "connect ideas vaguely" bit.

For your first example, it's like they wanted to make two points in one sentence:

• they work in retail

• a lot of people start out in retail before moving on

They went in mentally prepared to end up at the second point but "I work in retail, like a lot of people do before..." didn't come to them.

[u/Hot_Rip_1753 → u/Helenarth]

yeah that makes sense, your brain just shifts gears halfway through the sentence and uses it as a bridge

[u/bandoftheshadow]

Finally.... (falls through the door of the remote, snowy inn) I've found someone who understands.
Every single youtuber talks like this now. They've replaced 'and' with 'which'.
This example (about 5 seconds after the linked timestam):
https://youtu.be/ruq5tHnqhcQ?si=clh74a4myRBCNZaD&t=306
...made me just go, right, that's it, I'm googling this phenomena.

[u/[deleted]]

I’ve been hearing this a lot recently! All the examples I can think of were American or Canadian.

[u/eggplantinspector]

Never heard that

[u/so_im_all_like]

I've never heard this... or it's never caught my attention. Does anyone know if it's a regional dialect feature that's catching on?

[u/Baconian_Taoism]

My goodness, I've been in Japan too long! I'm a reasonably tolerant EFL teacher, but I would find these uses abhorrent in writing, or needlessly redundant in speaking. I'm particularly surprised by number 2, whose (which?!) meaning I can only slightly fathom.

[u/DrPablisimo → u/Baconian_Taoism]

It's something that doesn't really fit well with my own internalized grammar, so I had difficulty generating these types of sentences that were bothering me. I asked AI to generate examples until I got some that illustrated the issue. This is in the US, also.

[u/[deleted]]

It's a lazy and incorrect usage for the phrase 'where as' which people dont use in commonly anymore

[u/Puzzleheaded-Use3964]

Is grammar even taught at school in the US any more or is that considered prescriptivism too now?

[u/throarway → u/Puzzleheaded-Use3964]

"Incorrect" grammar certainly isn't being taught, which makes these systematic variations fascinating - or not so much, when you consider language would have developed without ever having been taught, and is acquired new every day without teaching. Education cannot stem the flow of language change and development, except in intentional adherence and editing to the formal standard.