Nominal relative clauses let a whole clause act like a noun, and they are one of the most useful structures in English grammar for building precise, natural sentences. In practical terms, a nominal relative clause is a clause introduced by words such as what, whatever, whoever, where, or how that functions as a subject, object, or complement. In the title pattern, “What you said was true,” the clause “What you said” works as the subject of the sentence. This matters because learners often meet these forms early, but mastering them affects sentence variety, punctuation, agreement, and even preposition choice. As an editor, I see the same issues repeatedly: confusion between what and that, uncertainty about whether a verb should be singular or plural, and awkward sentences created by separating the clause from the preposition it needs. This hub article explains how nominal relative clauses work, how they interact with prepositions, and how to use sentence-openers like what, whatever, and whoever accurately. It also connects the wider “Clauses & Prepositions” topic by showing how clause types and prepositional patterns shape meaning. If you can identify the role a clause plays in a sentence, you can make better choices about word order, emphasis, and formality.
What a nominal relative clause is and how it differs from other clauses
A nominal relative clause, sometimes called a free relative clause, contains its own relativizer and does not modify a separate noun. That is the key difference from a standard relative clause. In “the book that I bought,” the clause “that I bought” describes the noun “book.” In “What I bought was expensive,” there is no separate noun after what; the clause itself fills the noun slot. It can function as the subject (“What we need is time”), direct object (“I know what you mean”), object of a preposition (“They argued about what was fair”), subject complement (“This is what I wanted”), or appositive-like complement in a wider structure. Because the clause behaves like a noun phrase, you can often test it by replacing it with a pronoun such as it or something. If the sentence still works structurally, you are likely dealing with a nominal relative clause.
These clauses are central to the broader study of clauses because they blur the line between clause and phrase. They are equally important in the study of prepositions because prepositions frequently select clause-like complements in modern English, especially after verbs of thinking, speaking, and reacting: “about what happened,” “for whoever applies first,” “with what remains,” and “from whatever source is available.” In usage, they are common in conversation, journalism, legal drafting, and academic prose, but each register favors slightly different patterns. Formal prose often uses whoever and whomever carefully, while everyday speech usually prefers the less marked form or restructures the sentence entirely.
Starting sentences with what
Starting a sentence with what is the most common pattern, and it usually creates a clause meaning “the thing that” or “the things that.” For example, “What matters is consistency” means “The thing that matters is consistency.” This pattern is efficient because it allows a writer to foreground an idea without naming it twice. It is especially effective when introducing a summary judgment, contrast, or conclusion: “What the data shows is a seasonal decline.” “What I learned from editing legal contracts is that preposition placement changes interpretation.” “What readers remember most is the final sentence.” In each case, the opening clause creates focus and gives the predicate room to deliver the main point.
Writers often ask whether what can refer to people. In standard modern English, what in nominal relatives usually refers to things, ideas, situations, or content, not persons. Use whoever or a rephrased clause for people. Another frequent question concerns agreement. In “What we need is answers,” some speakers prefer are because the complement is plural, but standard edited prose often uses singular agreement when the whole opening clause is treated as a single unit: “What we need is clear rules.” Both patterns occur, yet consistency matters more than dogma. In published editing, I usually choose the form that sounds natural with the complement and avoids distraction.
Starting sentences with whatever and whoever
Whatever and whoever introduce broader, less fixed reference. They often carry the meaning “anything that,” “no matter what,” “any person who,” or “the person who.” “Whatever causes the delay should be identified immediately” means any cause, regardless of type. “Whoever submitted the report forgot the appendix” identifies a person without naming them. These forms are useful when the exact identity is unknown, irrelevant, open-ended, or intentionally generalized. They are common in policies, instructions, and contracts because they include all qualifying possibilities. A workplace rule such as “Whoever receives the complaint must log it the same day” is clear, concise, and enforceable.
There is a nuance between free choice and definite reference. “Take whatever you need” signals unrestricted choice within limits. “Whoever broke the seal will be interviewed” points to one specific but unidentified person. This distinction matters in grammar and in meaning. It also affects tone. Whatever can sound neutral in technical writing but dismissive in speech, depending on intonation. In formal writing, use it when the sentence truly needs breadth. If you mean a specific known item, a plain noun phrase is often better. Precision outranks novelty.
How nominal relative clauses connect to prepositions
Nominal relative clauses often appear after prepositions, and this is where many learners struggle. English allows structures such as “about what happened,” “to whoever answers first,” “with whatever tools are available,” and “from what I observed.” In each example, the preposition governs the whole clause, not just the opening word. This matters because the choice of preposition changes meaning sharply. Compare “angry about what he said” with “angry at whoever leaked the memo.” The first expresses reaction to content; the second targets a person. Verb-preposition combinations also guide the structure: depend on, object to, argue about, differ from, result from, and focus on all commonly take nominal relative clauses as complements.
One editing issue involves stranded versus fronted prepositions. “This depends on what you mean” is natural and standard. “On what you mean this depends” is grammatical but highly marked. In ordinary prose, keep the preposition where English normally wants it. Another issue is case after prepositions. Traditional grammar favors “to whomever it may concern,” because the pronoun is object of to. Yet in many sentences the internal role inside the clause controls the form, which is why “Give it to whoever needs it” is standard: whoever functions as subject of needs inside the clause. The safest approach is to analyze the pronoun’s role inside its own clause before applying a rule from the larger sentence.
Common patterns, errors, and a practical reference table
The most common mistakes are predictable. First, writers confuse nominal relatives with interrogatives and add unnecessary question marks or inversion. “What he wants is impossible” is a statement, not a question. Second, they use that where only what works: not “That he said was helpful,” but “What he said was helpful,” unless a full content clause is intended, as in “That he spoke up was helpful.” Third, they force a personal meaning into what instead of choosing whoever or a noun phrase. Fourth, they mishandle prepositions by omitting them entirely after verbs that require them, producing sentences like “We discussed what happened” when the intended meaning was “We argued about what happened.” Both are grammatical, but they do not mean the same thing.
| Pattern | Meaning | Example | Common issue |
|---|---|---|---|
| What + clause | the thing(s) that | What changed the result was timing. | Confused with “that” clauses |
| Whatever + clause | anything that; no matter what | Whatever remains should be archived. | Used when reference is actually specific |
| Whoever + clause | the person who; any person who | Whoever calls first gets the slot. | Wrongly replaced by “what” |
| Preposition + nominal relative | clause as object of preposition | They voted on what was practical. | Missing or wrong preposition |
As a hub for “Clauses & Prepositions,” this topic links naturally to related areas: relative clauses, content clauses, adverbial clauses, prepositional verbs, preposition stranding, complement patterns, and pronoun case. When teaching or editing across these subtopics, I start with function. Ask what job the clause is doing, which word licenses it, and whether a preposition is required by the verb, adjective, or noun before it. That simple workflow prevents most errors faster than memorizing isolated examples.
How to choose the right structure in real writing
Good writers choose nominal relative clauses for emphasis, cohesion, and economy. Start with what when you want to spotlight an idea before naming its significance: “What this policy changes is the approval timeline.” Use whatever when scope must stay open: “Use whatever evidence meets the audit standard.” Use whoever when the human referent is unknown or generalized: “Whoever manages the handoff should confirm receipt.” Then check the preposition. If the governing word requires one, keep it: “object to whatever reduces clarity,” “rely on whoever is on call,” “learn from what failed.” In business writing, this produces leaner sentences than padded alternatives. In academic writing, it helps definitions land cleanly. In legal writing, it reduces ambiguity when drafted carefully.
The main benefit of mastering nominal relative clauses is control. You can open sentences with focus, connect clauses to the right prepositions, and avoid common errors that weaken clarity. Remember the core distinctions: what usually refers to things or ideas, whoever to people, and whatever to open choice or unrestricted reference. Treat the whole clause as a noun unit, then test its role as subject, object, or complement. If a verb, adjective, or noun requires a preposition, include it and place it where normal English expects it. As you build your knowledge of clauses and prepositions, use this page as your central guide, then apply the same functional analysis to related grammar topics. Review your own sentences, identify the clause’s job, and revise until the structure says exactly what you mean.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a nominal relative clause in English grammar?
A nominal relative clause is a type of clause that functions like a noun in a sentence. Instead of naming a person, thing, place, or idea with a single word, it expresses that meaning through a whole clause. These clauses are commonly introduced by words such as what, whatever, whoever, where, and how. For example, in the sentence What you said was true, the clause What you said acts as the subject of the sentence. It is doing the same grammatical job that a noun phrase such as Your comment could do.
This structure is especially important because it allows speakers and writers to be precise without sounding unnatural. A nominal relative clause can act as a subject, as in What happened surprised everyone; as an object, as in I understand what you mean; or as a complement, as in This is what I wanted. In each case, the entire clause behaves as one noun unit. That is the key idea to remember: although it contains its own subject and verb, the clause fills a noun position in the larger sentence.
Learners often find nominal relative clauses useful because they appear constantly in everyday English, academic writing, conversations, and professional communication. Once you recognize that these clauses function like nouns, they become much easier to identify and use correctly. They help connect ideas smoothly and often sound more natural than shorter, more mechanical sentence patterns.
How do words like “what,” “whatever,” and “whoever” work at the beginning of a sentence?
When words like what, whatever, and whoever begin a sentence, they often introduce a nominal relative clause that serves as the subject. In a sentence such as What she wrote changed my mind, the clause What she wrote is the complete subject. The word what does not simply ask a question here. Instead, it introduces a clause meaning “the thing that she wrote.” That entire unit functions as a noun.
The same pattern works with broader or less specific meanings. Whatever you decide is fine with me means “anything that you decide is fine with me.” Similarly, Whoever called earlier did not leave a message means “the person who called earlier did not leave a message,” even though the speaker does not know or does not specify the person’s identity. These introductory words allow the speaker to refer to unknown, indefinite, or general things and people in a compact, natural way.
One reason this structure matters is that learners sometimes mistake these sentence openings for questions. However, the word order usually stays in standard statement order, not question order. We say What he needs is more time, not What does he need is more time. That difference is essential. If the clause is nominal and functioning as a noun, it uses normal clause order. Understanding this helps learners avoid one of the most common grammatical errors with this pattern.
What is the difference between “what” and “that which,” and why is “what” more common?
In many cases, what can be understood as meaning the thing that or that which. For example, I know what you mean is similar in meaning to I know the thing that you mean, although the second version sounds very unnatural in modern English. This is why grammar books often explain what as containing its own antecedent. In simpler terms, what already includes the idea of “the thing,” so you do not usually need to add a separate noun before it.
This explains why some combinations are incorrect. For instance, learners sometimes write the thing what I need, which is not standard in this meaning. If you use what, it already carries the noun idea within it, so the correct form is simply what I need. On the other hand, if you want a separate noun first, you would normally use a relative clause with that or which, such as the thing that I need.
What is far more common than that which because it is shorter, smoother, and more natural in modern English. That which may appear in legal, formal, literary, or highly rhetorical writing, but in most real-life contexts it sounds stiff or old-fashioned. For clear and natural English, especially in speech and everyday writing, what is usually the best choice. Learning this distinction helps students produce English that is not only grammatically correct but also idiomatic.
How can I tell whether a clause with “what” is a question or a nominal relative clause?
The most reliable way to tell the difference is to look at the function of the clause in the sentence and the word order inside it. In a direct question, what asks for information: What did she say? Here, the sentence is requesting an answer, and the auxiliary verb comes before the subject. In a nominal relative clause, what does not ask a question. Instead, it introduces a noun-like clause: What she said was surprising. In this sentence, What she said is the subject of the verb was.
Word order is one of the clearest signals. Questions usually involve inversion, such as What did he mean? or What is she doing? A nominal relative clause keeps ordinary statement order: what he meant, what she is doing. This pattern is important because learners often overuse question order inside nominal clauses. For example, I know what does he want is incorrect. The correct sentence is I know what he wants.
Another useful test is substitution. If the clause can be replaced by a noun phrase such as the answer, the idea, or the thing, it is probably a nominal relative clause. In What they chose was expensive, the clause could be replaced by The item they chose or simply It. That confirms its noun-like role. This kind of analysis helps learners move beyond memorization and understand how the structure actually works in real sentences.
What are the most common mistakes learners make with nominal relative clauses?
One of the most common mistakes is using question word order inside the clause. Because words like what and whoever can appear in questions, learners sometimes produce forms such as I wonder what does he think or What did she say was interesting when they mean a nominal clause. In standard English, nominal relative clauses use normal statement order: I wonder what he thinks and What she said was interesting. Mastering this point immediately improves grammatical accuracy.
Another frequent problem is confusion between what and that. Learners may write the book what I bought when they need a regular relative clause, or that I need is obvious when they actually need a nominal relative clause. The difference is structural. What usually means the thing that and stands alone without a separate noun. By contrast, that introduces a clause attached to an existing noun, as in the book that I bought. Recognizing whether the noun is already present makes the choice much easier.
Learners also sometimes struggle with agreement and sentence planning when the subject is a whole clause. For example, in What they want is unclear, the entire clause is treated as a singular unit, so is is standard. In addition, students may be unsure about meaning differences between what, whatever, and whoever. What usually refers to a specific but unidentified thing, while whatever adds a broader idea of “anything that.” Similarly, whoever means “any person who” or “the person who,” depending on context. Paying attention to these subtle differences helps learners use the forms naturally and confidently.
Finally, many students underuse nominal relative clauses because they seem advanced, even though they are extremely common in fluent
