語法書中這樣描述的時候對不對？

01-04

在讀賴世雄的《賴氏經典英語語法》（https://book.douban.com/subject/25974373/）的時候經常碰上這種情況，一種用法一會說它劣，一會說它可，然後一會又打叉號。那這類說法到底可不可以用啊?
比方說這個圖

更新：
上圖這個例子書中的講解在這裡：

另外，賴世雄的語法書裡面這種類似的東西其實還挺多的。隨手拍了幾個。

謝邀！

I am not sure who wrote this grammar or writing book. But, if "劣" means "bad" and "佳" means "good", I disagree with what it says there:

Grammatically, the second sentence "This is a question which you should pay attention to," is less correct because an English sentence should not end with a preposition. The first sentence, "This is a question to which you should pay attention," is the more correct way of saying it.

Unfortunately, people are paying less attention to this rule, so the second sentence is somehow acceptable. However, saying the second sentence is better than the first is absolutely misleading.

The third and the fourth sentences are both correct, because neither of them end with a preposition.

I hope this is clear and helpful.

**************************************

栗子的知乎答案索引：栗子樹

栗子的微信公眾號：E-Speller 或者 栗子英文 （只有精彩的原創）

**************************************

誒？

我還覺得把preposition放在relative pronoun之前更舒服呢……

哦實名反對栗子的答案：

Ending sentences with prepositions | Oxford Dictionaries

Can you end a sentence with a preposition? | OxfordWords blog

Why shouldn""t we use prepositions to end sentences with?

當然，加拿大是不是比英國更『傳統化』、『拉丁化』我是不知道的。但起碼我英國用的現代英語，preposition (或者使用作adverb particles) 拿來做結尾毫無問題。

題主的疑問在第1、2個連接內也能找到答案。（光感謝沒用只有贊才能把答案頂上去蓋過大V犯的錯誤，畢竟作為一個小透明幾乎每次回答英語話題都是在嘗試糾正大V的錯誤，也是很艱難的）

===========

@栗子

I"m surprised how Canadians still apply Latin grammar rule to their English. "An English sentence should not end with a preposition" is a saying that is as obsolete as the Latin language itself. It is true that upper-class in the 19th century stuck to this "rule" because they were told (in school) that the opposite was "how the lower-class talk". However, that was mostly because the upper-class conceited their ability to write in Latin and hence extended the rule from the "superior and prestigious" Latin grammar to its "barbaric and boorish" brother, which only unveiled their excessive obsession with linguistic (or any form of) supremacy .

——

這個人貌似改了答案?我記性不好你不要騙我。

我重點在於，那條"語法規則"從來沒有正式地存在過。

一個簡單的方法：這一類固定的短語動詞，都不將介詞置於關係代詞之前。(不過 pay attention to 這個確實有把to拿到前面的用法)

蟹妖。

完了，我很喜歡說to which you should pay attention耶~我劣了嗚嗚嗚

劣佳勾叉這系統的確不嚴謹，但只要記住叉說明不能那樣說就好了，有些動詞短語要放在一起才是那個意思~

好比一些中文詞動詞短語，我們一般不說把覺睡了，把步跑了，把泳遊了；但把舞跳了，把歌唱了，把飯吃了這種動賓結構的就可以。道理很簡單。

call on 之所以不能拆成on whom I called，是因為call on 共同組成「拜訪」的含義。沒有on完全不是同一個含義。

pay attention to如果去掉to，它的含義還能維持，還是表示「注意」。

所以第一種是不能拆開用的，第二種他認為能拆但是拆了不好（我的看法是主要是不符合表達習慣）。

個人理解是，有固定特定含義拆了含義消失的片語不能拆，有固定搭配但是拆了意思還能保持的，拆了不好，不過硬要拆也拿你沒辦法。

當動詞+介詞不是固定搭配片語時，習慣用法是拆的。

不知道有沒有說清楚。

謝邀。

樓主既然都發現這種問題了，為什麼不質疑一下書本身呢？

後面拍的幾張圖都完全沒有問題。照著語法書說的做就可以了。

第一張圖裡面他說to which you should pay attention是劣我不是很認同。這種用法應該常用於各種正式場合，下面那種which you should pay attention to是現在已經廣泛接受乃至認可的用法【在正統英語語法裡面不知道還算不算錯誤（沒有查過母語人士編的語法書），但是誰管那個】總之他可以用就是了。

題主比較疑惑的或許是底下那個on whom i called為什麼就算錯還打了個×。這就是傳說中的phrasal verbs……比如說單單看make up你完全不知道為什麼和化妝有關係，call on也明明和拜訪完全沒關係啊。碰到這種情況就不能把介詞拆掉換到which whom前面去了，因為這裡的on和call一起組成了一個動詞意義，拆開會引發誤解。

A preposition is a word you should not end a sentence with. ???

@栗子 @Don Von

OK, let me get back to the question.

I totally agree with @Don Von . The so-called "never-end-a-sentence-with-a--preposition-rule" @栗子 mentioned probably is no longer valid and applicable in modern English.

I see no problem in the grammer book. In most cases it"s not about right or wrong, but about what is more commonly used/said, and what sounds "better".

首先謝邀~

關係代詞在定語從句中用作介詞賓語時，介詞既可置於從句之首，亦可置於從句之末。但以置於從句之首較為正式。如：

This is the book for which you asked. 這是你所要的書。(關係代詞用作介詞for賓語，介系詞for放在從句的開頭，即which之前)

This is the book which you asked for. 這是你所要的書。(介詞for置於從句之末，which在此可省去)

有些「動詞+介詞」結構，如果介詞提前，將會失去短語動詞原來的意思，這種情況下一般不把短語拆開，講介詞提前。如：

This is the right book for which I』m looking. ( X )

This is the right book which I』m looking for. (√)

關係代詞who和that用作介詞賓語時，介詞須置於句末。如：

The people who you were talking to are Swedes. 你與之談話的那些人是瑞典人。(關係代詞主格who用作介詞to賓語時，介詞to須置於從句之末，who中口語中可省去)

Here is the car that I told you about. 這兒就是我和你談過的那輛汽車。(關係代詞that用作介詞about賓語，介詞about須置於從句之末)

有時從句還有其它成分，介詞則置於從句之中。如：

This is the boy whom he worked with in the office. 那就是與他一道辦公的那個男孩

幾個照片中的說法，除了 how 作定從引導詞時必須省略這條，其他的都沒問題。pay attention to 不是短語詞。

作者好熟悉啊

不搞這一套

覺得句子以上都對

我常喜歡寫 of which 和 for which

歡迎指正

常寫 … is ...,for which ...is...

The distinguish feature of it, in time distribution, is the seasonal variation, for which ...are subjected to seasonal changes

或者 of which 更多用的時候也很隨意

It is because... ,of which...I ....

因為…所以我做…由於前面那個因為大概就是這個結構

我一直覺得 of which 我用了肯定錯

但我一直用

還有就是表示成分一般這麼用

The main source of pollutants is the water flowing coming from the upstream, on which A,B and C are respectively for ...%, ...% and ...%

介詞結尾的我覺得跟動作連貫性有關

前面的前置更像是一種從屬關係在…的基礎上

與前面有邏輯關係

介詞在前通順些

The problem is where we are going to

The problem is the place to where we are going

我覺得接的很自然

The problem is where to go

The problem is where we come to

The problem is to which place we are going

也OK

首先

個人感覺pay attention to 跟 call on是不一樣的

所以第一第二句他舉的例子，我個人覺得是完全錯誤的，而且個人是喜歡to which 這種用法

其次，

我覺得他也不是說的全錯

像call on這種詞一般看作一個整體不怎麼拆開來

一般不怎麼見到on which they call這種，現代英語裡面

不過總體來說

這本語法書給我的感覺真的是超差

一般情況下，如果動詞和介詞構成特定意義的短語時，在定從當中，不應把介詞拖到前面。

僅僅作為語言交流，不用精通，但必須得會，也就是知道怎麼用就行。因為要正確說英語，語法關必須得過，要不說出來的英語都不正確，會惹出很多笑話的。如果要深入研究，就必須得精通，知其然還得知其所以然。