A question for Chrispenycate and other grammarians

[TitaniumTi]

I was thinking so hard about one grammatical question in a workshop task tonight that I stumbled into quite a different grammatical pratfall.
(Thanks for the correction, Chrispenycate.)

I'm still undecided about my original quandary, however. Which is preferable?

I had thought I was prepared for anything.

OR

I had thought that I was prepared for anything.

 

[HareBrain]

Very strictly, I believe the second is more correct. But both are perfectly acceptable, and to me, the first reads better. The optional "that" sometimes seems necessary for clarity and sometimes not.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

For flow, I'd go with one. I would also contract to I'd - again for flow. But either is right, I think, grammatically.

 

[alchemist]

I don't think grammar comes into it either; it's taste, and whichever voice suits your character best.

 

[Lenny]

I've always preferred the first over the second, but I think [that] both are technically correct.

There are a few nice answers on the "English" Stack Exchange for this question: grammaticality - Are there rules about using "that" to join two clauses? - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Of particular interest will be the accepted answer:

That can almost always be dropped. In your example, that is being used as a conjunction, i.e. it is introducing a subordinate clause as the object of the main sentence. In most situations where this is the case, it can be dropped. I cannot think of any where it can't be dropped.

When that is used as a demonstrative pronoun, e.g. "that was a nice question," it must be kept or replaced with another pronoun, e.g. "yours was a nice question."

When used as a relative pronoun, it can usually be dropped. For instance, "several people read the question that you wrote" can also be "several people read the question you wrote". But if used in a question with who, it should be kept. For example, "Who was the person that wrote this question?" cannot be *"Who was the person wrote this question?".

 

[chrispenycate]

Oops, coming in late.

Technically, I suppose that since 'I was ready for anything' is neither a noun or an adverb the 'that' is in there, either articulated or understood, but I certainly wouldn't correct either, either in dialogue or first person narration. You have to listen to your character; the 'that' makes him a tiny bit fussier, more concentrated on details, while the 'I'd thought I was' is a fraction more relaxed, more street.

But either works.

 

[Mouse]

Please don't let this run to six pages...

Definitely: I had thought I was prepared for anything.

I always remove unnecessary 'thats.' Also, I kinda agree with springs's 'I'd' but it depends where the stress is...

I had thought I was prepared for anything.

 

[TitaniumTi]

Thanks, everybody.

It's great to resolve a niggling uncertainty that has vexed me for years.