Can I delete the "is" in this sentence?

[c2k5]

‘read the fine print of whatever loan document is shoved under your nose’
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/fine_print

#1 Read the fine print of the loan document shoved under your nose.
#2 Read the fine print of whatever loan document shoved under your nose.

Is my creation #1 and #2 grammatically correct?
If the "is" is compulsory, please explain the reason.

 

[SoothingDave]

"Delete," not "delate."

Sentence 1 is OK. Sentence 2 is not.

 

[jutfrank]

In the original, the verb is is an auxiliary forming a passive voice construction.

In your sentence 1, the auxiliary is omitted but you can still understand it as being there in some underlying way. To help you understand this, add that is before shoved.

In your sentence 2, the auxiliary is not there at all, which means the sentence is read in the active voice, which doesn't make sense.

 

[constantinusphilo]

In the original, the verb is is an auxiliary forming a passive voice construction.

In your sentence 1, the auxiliary is omitted but you can still understand it as being there in some underlying way. To help you understand this, add that is before shoved.

In your sentence 2, the auxiliary is not there at all, which means the sentence is read in the active voice, which doesn't make sense.

However, one can say: "Read the fine print of any document shoved under your nose."

NOT A TEACHER.

 

[emsr2d2]

The important word in your original sentence is "whatever".

John: What sort of cake do you want for your birthday?
Helen: I'll eat whatever cake is provided!!

James: Should I read the fine print of the contract? I'm not sure what they're going to send me.
Sarah: You should read the fine print of whatever document is attached to the email.

 

[c2k5]

In the original, the verb is is an auxiliary forming a passive voice construction.

However, one can say: "Read the fine print of any document shoved under your nose."

The important word in your original sentence is "whatever".

Thanks, is my understanding correct?
#3 Read the fine print of whatever document is shoved under your nose. (correct)
#4 Read the fine print of whatever document that is shoved under your nose. (correct, #3 = #4)
#5 Read the fine print of any document shoved under your nose. (correct)
#6 Read the fine print of any document that is shoved under your nose. (correct, #5 = #6)
#7 Read the fine print of any document is shoved under your nose. (wrong)

 

[emsr2d2]

Thanks, is my understanding correct?
#3 Read the fine print of whatever document is shoved under your nose. (correct)
#4 Read the fine print of whatever document that is shoved under your nose. (correct, #3 = #4)
#5 Read the fine print of any document shoved under your nose. (correct)
#6 Read the fine print of any document that is shoved under your nose. (correct, #5 = #6)
#7 Read the fine print of any document is shoved under your nose. (wrong)

Almost there! Sentence 4 above is wrong. You can't use "whatever" and "that is" in that sentence. If you want to use "that is", you have to use "any".

 

[Tarheel]

Almost there! Sentence 4 above is wrong. You can't use "whatever" and "that is" in that sentence. If you want to use "that is", you have to use "any".

Why?

 

[PaulMatthews]

Why?

Read the fine print of [whatever loan document is shoved under your nose].

"Whatever loan document is shoved under your nose” is a noun phrase in a ‘fused’ relative construction where the fusion involves “whatever loan document”.

In "whatever loan document" we have an NP serving simultaneously as the head of a larger NP and as the wh-phrase at the beginning of a relative clause.

Externally, "whatever loan document is shoved under your nose” behaves like a noun phrase; internally it looks just like a relative clause (though with a wh-word, "whatever", not ordinarily allowed in relative clauses in Standard English), where “is” is head and hence is obligatory.

Since the relativised element in the relative clause already contains fused “whatever”, it cannot also contain “that”, which explains why the OP's example #4 is ungrammatical.