In spoken English, substituting 'who' for 'whom' can be appropriate when 'whom' feels overly formal or stilted. This substitution often occurs when 'whom' would act as the object of the verb in informal contexts, as people prioritize fluidity and ease of conversation over grammatical precision. For example, in 'The boy who we met just now is Susan’s brother,' the use of 'who' is accepted in spoken English. Formal writing, however, generally adheres to traditional grammatical rules, preserving 'whom' in such contexts for clarity and correctness .

In defining relative clauses, 'that' is often used for informal contexts to specify a particular person or thing among several possibilities, potentially omitting the relative pronoun entirely if it functions as the object. Using 'which' instead can lend a more formal tone to the sentence, often without affecting the basic meaning. However, 'that' tends to be preferred when speaking casually or when a restriction to a particular subject is intended. Choosing between them depends largely on formality and stylistic preferences .

The use of relative clauses enhances information density by integrating relevant details directly into sentences without needing separate statements, promoting coherence and conciseness. They allow for the seamless addition of descriptive and clarifying information about nouns, as in 'The strike, which began ten days ago, has ended.' However, complexities arise as dense information or misused punctuation can sometimes obscure meaning or overload a reader if not managed carefully. Correct punctuation and strategic placement improve clarity, ensuring that additional context uplifts rather than burdens the sentence .

In non-defining relative clauses, relative pronouns such as 'who', 'whom', and 'which' introduce additional information that is non-essential to the main meaning of the sentence and are grammatically distinct from defining clauses. In non-defining clauses these pronouns cannot be replaced by 'that' as they provide specific, supplementary details and are always necessary to convey the intended nuance .

The relative pronoun 'whose' functions to indicate possession and can describe ownership in both defining and non-defining relative clauses. It applies to both people and things. For example, 'I have a friend whose brother is a designer' indicates the designer is the friend’s brother. This flexibility is significant as it offers a concise way to link possession to the subject without repeating names or using separate sentences, which streamlines sentence structure and enhances readability .

In defining relative clauses, the relative pronoun can be omitted when it functions as the object of the clause, as in the example: 'The book you bought last week is on the table.' However, when the pronoun acts as the subject, it cannot be omitted. In contrast, in non-defining relative clauses, the pronoun cannot be omitted regardless of whether it is the subject or the object, as non-defining clauses provide non-essential additional information and require the pronoun to maintain grammatical integrity .

Relative clauses provide additional information about a noun, specifying which person or thing is being talked about or adding extra details. Defining relative clauses are essential to the meaning of the sentence as they specify the person or thing being referred to, usually beginning with pronouns like who, whom, which, or that. For example, 'The boy who won the race is my brother.' Non-defining relative clauses, however, add extra information that can be omitted without changing the sentence’s basic meaning, and they are typically set off by commas. These clauses use pronouns like who, whom, or which but never that, and they cannot be omitted .

A strategy for teaching differences between defining and non-defining relative clauses could involve a multi-step approach. First, introduce students to the basic structure using clear examples, highlighting that defining clauses specify essential information and are not comma-separated, while non-defining clauses offer additional, removable details separated by commas. Next, engage students in exercises combining sentences into each type of clause, discussing the impact on sentence meaning. Finally, conduct peer review sessions where students identify and correct misplaced or missing punctuation, reinforcing their understanding through practice and collaborative learning .

Relative clauses can be used to combine two sentences into one by incorporating shared elements from both sentences into a single clause, often using relative pronouns. For instance, 'A girl was injured in the accident. She is now in hospital.' becomes 'The girl who was injured in the accident is now in hospital.' This process of combining sentences enhances sentence complexity and provides cohesion by linking two closely related ideas, thus enhancing both economy and fluidity in writing .

Commas in non-defining relative clauses indicate that the information is supplementary and non-essential. Their correct use helps clarify that the clause is additional and not necessary to the main meaning of the sentence. Misuse or omission of these commas could lead to confusion by merging supplementary information with essential sentence content, potentially altering the message and causing misunderstandings. For instance, in the sentence 'My brother, who lives in Hong Kong, is an architect,' commas emphasize that living in Hong Kong is additional information about the brother .