Do you need a "that" after the word "ensure?" Forum

[tx1987]

This is the sentence:

I, the girl who prided herself on never asking for help, now relied on a five-foot, 100-pound physical therapist to ensure my face did not abruptly acquaint itself with the floor.

Do I need a "that" after the word "ensure?"

[Yimbeezy]

This is the sentence:

I, the girl who prided herself on never asking for help, now relied on a five-foot, 100-pound physical therapist to ensure my face did not abruptly acquaint itself with the floor.

Do I need a "that" after the word "ensure?"

All I know is that it is quite odd without a "that". I'd include it.

[Mr. Pablo]

put the 'that' in.

[b.gump81]

also is the proud girl relying on not having her face hit the floor or yours?

[D. H2Oman]

also is the proud girl relying on not having her face hit the floor or yours?

lol

[Borhas]

This is the sentence:

I, the girl who prided herself on never asking for help, now relied on a five-foot, 100-pound physical therapist to ensure my face did not abruptly acquaint itself with the floor.

Do I need a "that" after the word "ensure?"

no, but as useless as "that" is, it ensures that speech flows better for some reason

[tx1987]

also is the proud girl relying on not having her face hit the floor or yours?

Yes, it was. Long story.

[b.gump81]

also is the proud girl relying on not having her face hit the floor or yours?

Yes, it was. Long story.

sorry, i misread your sentence...i missed the "I" in the beginning and thought you were switching point of view...and no you don't need "that," but it sounds better in this case

[Miniver]

...

[deadatheist]

no. your sentence is already quite long, and "that" isn't serving a necessary grammatical purpose in this context.

it's similar though in some circumstances to choosing between "abide" and "abide by" where in those circumstances you don't need the "by" but people add it because it's a habit.

i think a fair rule of thumb is cut out unnecessary words. period. don't add just to add. and as previously mentioned, "that" can almost 90% of the time be cut out and your writing won't suffer.

hth.

[castellon]

"USAGE 1 The word 'that' can be omitted in standard English where it introduces a subordinate clause..."

You are allowed to drop it, although I think it sounds better included.

[summerstar]

Yes, use "ensure that". Economy of words does not apply here. This is the correct phrase. I think we've all been influenced too much by "commercial speak" without our even realising it. ( For example, one that I hate is "impacting" when you mean "had an impact on". "Impacting" means something entirely different.)

[gochrisgo]

Yes, use "ensure that". Economy of words does not apply here. This is the correct phrase. I think we've all been influenced too much by "commercial speak" without our even realising it. ( For example, one that I hate is "impacting" when you mean "had an impact on". "Impacting" means something entirely different.)

You're talking about the misuse of a word.

The OP's question is whether "that" operates here as a subordinate conjunction or relative pronoun. One she can remove, one she can't.

edit: removed he/she business.

[gochrisgo]

.

[summerstar]

Yes, use "ensure that". Economy of words does not apply here. This is the correct phrase. I think we've all been influenced too much by "commercial speak" without our even realising it. ( For example, one that I hate is "impacting" when you mean "had an impact on". "Impacting" means something entirely different.)

You're talking about the misuse of a word.

The OP's question is whether "that" operates here as a subordinate conjunction or relative pronoun. One she can remove, one she can't.

edit: removed he/she business.

"That" is the relative pronoun that is part of the subordinate conjunction. And I referred to the misuse of words in popular culture to illustrate the changes in our grammatical ear which falsely accustom us to misusage.

[autarkh]

Presuming you want to maintain the original meaning of the sentence without any major revisions, here's my suggestion:

I—who took pride in never asking for help—was now forced to rely completely on a 5 foot, 100 pound physical therapist to keep my face from abruptly making the floor’s acquaintance.

[summerstar]

Presuming you want to maintain the original meaning of the sentence, here's my suggestion:

I—who took pride in never asking for help—was now forced to rely completely on a 5 foot, 100 pound physical therapist to keep my face from abruptly making the floor’s acquaintance.

like that.

[gochrisgo]

.

[ccs224]

That is much smoother. My guess is that people in the midwest would omit it, but it would be expected pretty much anywhere else. And by midwest I mean all non-coastal states.

If we're talking economy of words, let's change the phrase "abruptly acquaint itself with" to hit or a similar, succinct synonym. Using "acquaint [itself] with" to imply some sort of unpleasurable interaction with something else seems a bit cliche in my book.

[summerstar]

Yes, use "ensure that". Economy of words does not apply here. This is the correct phrase. I think we've all been influenced too much by "commercial speak" without our even realising it. ( For example, one that I hate is "impacting" when you mean "had an impact on". "Impacting" means something entirely different.)

You're talking about the misuse of a word.

The OP's question is whether "that" operates here as a subordinate conjunction or relative pronoun. One she can remove, one she can't.

edit: removed he/she business.

"That" is the relative pronoun that is part of the subordinate conjunction. And I referred to the misuse of words in popular culture to illustrate the changes in our grammatical ear which falsely accustom us to misusage.

Do you mean "that" is part of the subordinate clause? Because it can't be part of the conjunction (if we're using that word only as a term to indicate parts of speech).

edit: as far as i remember, "that" is most often used as:
- relative pronoun (I can't find the toy that makes the noise)
- demonstrative adjective (I want that toy)
- demonstrative pronoun (I want that)
- subordinate conjunction (and this is where I start to get lost... adverb clause/noun clauses/adjective clauses/etc.)

You can remove "that" when it's a relative pronoun introducing a subordinate clause

Thanks, dude, for the grammar lessons! Hell, what do I know, I'm a poet... with a license to mess it all up!

[gochrisgo]

.

[summerstar]

and if they're French, there's always a "que" somewhere...everywhere, even when you don't think you need one.

"qu'est-ce que c'est que ca?" Jeez, I'll never forget THAT one. (no pun intended...well, maybe a little).

Haha!

Cheers!