which explained

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "which explained" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to provide clarification or additional information about a subject previously mentioned. Example: "The study presented new findings, which explained the unexpected results observed in the experiment."

✓ Grammatically correct

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

58 human-written examples

Which A5?

The New York Times

Speaking of which: 3.

The New Yorker

Which 60-gigahertz technology will prevail?

The Economist

Qf7!, after which 25 Bc6?

The New York Times

Which 14 positions?

The New York Times

Which 50s classic to choose?

The Guardian - Music

Which 15 would you take?

The New York Times

miles, of which 1.24 sq.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

(f4!) after which 29 b4! cracked the defences.

The Guardian - Sport

So, which 14 lines would you choose?

The Guardian

Of which 204,000 (53%) have dependent children.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "which explained", ensure the clause it introduces directly clarifies the preceding statement to maintain clarity and coherence.

Common error

Avoid using "which explained" when the connection between the clause and the preceding statement is unclear. Ensure the explanation is directly relevant and easily understood to prevent confusing the reader.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "which explained" functions as a relative clause introducing additional information or clarification about a preceding noun or clause. It serves to expand upon the previous statement, offering further insight or reason. Ludwig AI indicates this is a grammatically correct construct.

Expression frequency: Missing

Frequent in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, while "which explained" is a grammatically correct construction used to introduce explanatory clauses, its absence in the provided examples suggests it might be less common in certain contexts. Ludwig AI confirms its grammatical validity. When using this phrase, ensure it directly clarifies the preceding statement and is preceded by a comma when introducing a nonrestrictive clause. Alternatives like "that clarified" or "which detailed" can be used depending on the desired nuance. Its frequency is currently missing from our data, highlighting the importance of context-aware writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

that clarified

Replaces "explained" with a synonym that emphasizes making something clearer.

that elucidated

Uses a more formal verb, "elucidated", to suggest a more detailed explanation.

which detailed

Shifts the focus to providing specific details rather than a comprehensive explanation.

which described

Offers a general account or representation of something.

that illustrated

Indicates that something was made clear through examples or visual aids.

which demonstrated

Implies proof or evidence was provided.

which showed

A simpler alternative that focuses on revealing information.

that accounted for

Focuses on providing a reason or cause for something.

which justified

Suggests providing reasons or evidence to support a claim or action.

that rationalized

Uses a more formal and analytical approach to provide a logical explanation.

FAQs

How can I use "which explained" in a sentence?

Use "which explained" to introduce a clause that clarifies or provides additional information about a previously mentioned subject. For instance, 'The study presented new findings, "that clarified" the unexpected results observed in the experiment'.

What can I say instead of "which explained"?

You can use alternatives like ""that clarified"", "that elucidated", or "which detailed" depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it always necessary to use a comma before "which explained"?

Yes, when "which explained" introduces a nonrestrictive clause (a clause that provides additional, but not essential, information), it should be preceded by a comma. This helps to set off the clause and improve readability.

What's the difference between using "that explained" and "which explained"?

While both can introduce explanatory clauses, "that" is typically used for restrictive clauses (essential to the sentence's meaning), and "which" is used for nonrestrictive clauses (additional, non-essential information). Using "which" correctly usually requires a comma before it.