Who/whom

Terie · Jan 19, 2011

gothicangel said:
"However, Robertson presents the readers with a Scotland who’s histories are discontinuous, fragmented and episodic.'

Is this correct, or as it is an academic senetence, should it be 'whom'?

Who's is a contraction meaning 'who is'.

Backslashbaby is correct: whose.

Chase · Jan 19, 2011

maestrowork said:
...when Jane finds evidence her parents, whom her grandfather never mentioned, may be living....

Exceptionally good rewrite.

Dumbed-down dialogue aside, writers thinking "whom" should be replaced by "who" in modern fiction need to upgrade the company they keep. It only sounds strange to people impressed by celebrities on late night talk shows.

claws2 · Jan 19, 2011

whom vs. who

As to "who versus "whom":

When I write my fiction prose, if "who" sounds okay to my ear then I keep it that way. Although I might, sometimes, think I know that in a specific instance that "whom" ought to be more proper, I'd still think really long and careful about actually using it (whom).

Of all things, I'd be very careful to not have it, whether it is in formal or informal prose, sound as if it is a "hypercorrection"--that is the biggest mistake to make, imo.

Now as to that specific example,

...when Jane finds evidence her parents, whom her grandfather never mentioned, may be living....

I'd be very careful if I wanted to use "whom" in that situation. If the usage of "whom" in that sentence makes itself stick out from the rest of the prose, then I'd use "who."

A good thing for a person to do to get solid info is to check out vetted sources, such as major dictionaries, and read their usage notes for "who" and "whom."

imo.

claws2 · Jan 19, 2011

who vs whom

For example, here is the usage note from the lexical entry "who" in the New Oxford American Dictionary on my iMac:

USAGE
1 A continuing debate in English usage is the question of when to use who and when to use whom. According to formal grammar, who forms the subjective case and so should be used in subject position in a sentence, as in : who decided this? The form whom, on the other hand, forms the objective case and so should be used in object position in a sentence, as in : whom do you think we should support? or : to whom do you wish to speak? Although there are some speakers who still use who and whom according to the rules of formal grammar as stated here, there are many more who rarely use whom at all; its use has retreated steadily and is now largely restricted to formal contexts. The normal practice in modern English is to use who instead of whom ( : who do you think we should support?) and, where applicable, to put the preposition at the end of the sentence ( : who do you wish to speak to?). Such uses are today broadly accepted in standard English, but in formal writing it is best to maintain the distinction.

2 On the use of who and that in relative clauses see usage at that .

whacko · Jan 19, 2011

scully931 said:
...when Jane finds evidence her parents, WHO(M) her grandfather never spoke of, may be living....

Ask yourself about variations between he and him.

You wouldn't say him grandfather.

But you'd talk about his, her, a, the, my... grandfather.

So who is is the proper one.

Yes it's a rule of thumb. But it stops me from being really boring.

Regards

Whacko

Marlys · Jan 19, 2011

ideagirl said:
No, it's even simpler than that...
If you would say he or she or they, use "who."
If you would say him or her or them, use "whom."

This. Very easy way to remember.

MMcQuown · Jan 20, 2011

"Baby" is right; 'whose' is the proper possessive.
Another hang-up is the improper use of the personal pronoun: I vs me, she vs her, he vs him. Easy way is to reverse the sentence: 'It is me ' is incorrect, because you would not say 'Me is it.' You would say, "I am it." This one gets butchered all the time. I almost never hear the proper pronoun used anymore. I think there is some peculiar notion out there that it sounds 'snooty'.

claws2 · Jan 20, 2011

MMcQuown said:
... Another hang-up is the improper use of the personal pronoun: I vs me, she vs her, he vs him. Easy way is to reverse the sentence: 'It is me ' is incorrect, because you would not say 'Me is it.' You would say, "I am it." This one gets butchered all the time. I almost never hear the proper pronoun used anymore. I think there is some peculiar notion out there that it sounds 'snooty'.

You are kidding, right?
You made that post of yours with tongue in cheek, didn't you?

When you kid like that in a grammar subforum, you probably ought to indicate that in some manner, such as by using a smiley face or something. For there are many here that read these threads that are trying to learn some grammar ...

claws2 · Jan 20, 2011

CGEL: nominative vs. accusative (I vs. me)

Here are some examples: CGEL, page 459,

Constructions where nominative and accusative are in alternation

There are a number of constructions where both cases are found. In most, the nominative is restricted to formal (or very formal) style, with the accusative appearing elsewhere.

(a) Subjective predicative complement
[9]
i.a. It is I who love you.
i.b. It's me who loves you.

ii.a. It is I she loves.
ii.b. It's me she loves.

iii.a. Yes, it is she!
iii.b. Yes, it's her!

iv.a. This is he / These are they.
iv.b. This is him / These are them.

v.a. ?The only one who objected was I.
v.b. The only one who objected was me.

vi.a. *This one here is I at the age of 12.
vi.b. This one here is me at the age of 12.

Probably the most frequent use of a nominative case predicative is in the it-cleft construction, as in (i-ii). And here we can make a distinction according to whether the pronoun would be in nominative or accusative case in the non-cleft counterpart: compare (i) with I love you and (ii) with She loves me. In the former, the accusative version (i.b) certainly has an informal flavour, whereas in the latter the nominative version (ii.a) seems very formal and the accusative (ii.b) relatively neutral in style. Nominatives are also found with it + be without a following relative clause, as in (iii.a). This is considered very formal -- and in response to the question Who's there? the nominative version It is I would be widely perceived as pedantic. The other main construction where a nominative is quite commonly found, again in formal style, is with a demonstrative as subject, as in (iv). It might also be used in if I were he (but hardly ?if you were I). Elsewhere, it is again likely to be perceived as somewhat pedantic. Most speakers would avoid examples like (v.a) -- which is easily done by reversing the order (I was the only one who objected). The context for (vi) is one where we are looking at an old photograph; it is difficult to imagine that anyone would use a nominative in construction with the following PP that we have here.

An example with the "*" symbol in front of it is ungrammatical; an example with the "?" symbol in front of it is "of questionable grammaticality"; the unmarked examples are Standard English.

claws2 · Jan 20, 2011

CGEL: nominative vs. accusative (I vs. me; who vs. whom)

Excerpt from CGEL, page 458,

16.2 Nominative and accusative

We look first at the contrast between nominative and accusative case, where we find a considerable amount of variation and instability in the system. There are a number of constructions where the nominative is associated with formal style, the accusative being strongly preferred in informal speech and writing. Because of the tendency of older prescriptive grammar to accept ony formal style as 'grammatically correct', there has been a tradition of criticising the accusative alternants, and the stigmatism attaching to such accusatives has given rise to a certain amount of hypercorrection, with nominatives being used in constructions where the traditional rules call for an accusative. Or at least this is the situation with the personal pronouns and determinatives: with interrogative and relative who the reverse situation obtains, the accusative whom being the case associated with formal style. ...

Hallen · Jan 20, 2011

You see, when terms like "Nominative and accusative are in alteration" are used, most people's eyes roll up in their collective heads, and they stop paying attention.

I understand we need words to describe grammatical constructions, but, goodness, it's confusing. I love writing, and I understand it's my responsibility to understand grammar, but things like the above seem to intentionally make it unnecessarily cryptic. Ah well, sorry for the rant. It's my personal problem.

Chase · Jan 20, 2011

Hallen said:
It's my personal problem.

I've been referred to the base chaplain several times for those, but to the problem of begging the question well:

Never hesitate . . .
To obfuscate!

gothicangel · Jan 20, 2011

Hallen said:
You see, when terms like "Nominative and accusative are in alteration" are used, most people's eyes roll up in their collective heads, and they stop paying attention.

I understand we need words to describe grammatical constructions, but, goodness, it's confusing. I love writing, and I understand it's my responsibility to understand grammar, but things like the above seem to intentionally make it unnecessarily cryptic. Ah well, sorry for the rant. It's my personal problem.

Just an academic way of speaking. We forget sometimes.

I even done linguistic undergrad classes, and my mind switches off too.

maestrowork · Jan 20, 2011

We look first at the contrast between nominative and accusative case, where we find a considerable amount of variation and instability in the system. There are a number of constructions where the nominative is associated with formal style, the accusative being strongly preferred in informal speech and writing. Because of the tendency of older prescriptive grammar to accept ony formal style as 'grammatically correct', there has been a tradition of criticising the accusative alternants, and the stigmatism attaching to such accusatives has given rise to a certain amount of hypercorrection, with nominatives being used in constructions where the traditional rules call for an accusative. Or at least this is the situation with the personal pronouns and determinatives: with interrogative and relative who the reverse situation obtains, the accusative whom being the case associated with formal style. ...

Thank goodness posters on this board don't generally write their advice like this.

Is it supposed to be intellectual?

rainsmom · Jan 20, 2011

Academic, I bet.

Silver King · Jan 20, 2011

claws2 said:
As to "who versus "whom":

When I write my fiction prose, if "who" sounds okay to my ear then I keep it that way. Although I might, sometimes, think I know that in a specific instance that "whom" ought to be more proper, I'd still think really long and careful about actually using it (whom)...

You seem to give a lot of credit to that ear of yours, claw, more than it deserves, I think. How words sound, in this case "who versus whom," is irrelevant to their proper usage.

claws2 · Jan 21, 2011

Silver King said:
Originally Posted by claws2
As to "who versus "whom":

When I write my fiction prose, if "who" sounds okay to my ear then I keep it that way. Although I might, sometimes, think I know that in a specific instance that "whom" ought to be more proper, I'd still think really long and careful about actually using it (whom)...

Click to expand...

You seem to give a lot of credit to that ear of yours, claw, more than it deserves, I think. How words sound, in this case "who versus whom," is irrelevant to their proper usage.

No. I give "a lot of credit" to CGEL and to the usage notes in dictionaries.

The proper use of "who versus whom" is better determined by referencing dictionaries (and also CGEL and other grammar tomes similar to it). And what is in them contradicts your claims. Your claims are irrelevant to the case of the proper usage of "who versus whom" because your claims contradict the usage notes in dictionaries.

boron · Jan 21, 2011

Hallen said:
You see, when terms like "Nominative and accusative are in alteration" are used, most people's eyes roll up in their collective heads, and they stop paying attention.

I understand we need words to describe grammatical constructions, but, goodness, it's confusing.

In Slovenian (one of Slavic languages) we have six 'cases', and a standard example question is given to students for each case for easier understanding. Every student in the 6th grade of the elementary school should know all cases by their names and should be able to use them properly (and it's much more complicated than in English, since noun endings change with each case).

1. Nominative: Who is here? He is here.
2. Genitive: Whom I don't see? I don't see him.
3. Dative: To whom I give? I give to him.
4. Accusative: Whom I see? I see him.
5. Locative: At whom I stand? I stand at him.
6. Instrumental: With whom I talk? I talk with him.

We have four different word variations for 'whom' and four for 'him', which is why we need so many cases. The question: 'Should I use whom or who' does not exist here, since the answer is so obvious

.

To understand the proper use in English language, the rule who = he, whom = him, is enough, I guess.

francist44 · Jan 21, 2011

Well… that was a let down. When I saw the posted question I was hoping I could come away with a rock-solid rule to end my confusion with those two words. As for the sentence in question, my vote is for whom. It just sounds right to me. I guess that will be my rule, go with what sounds right coming from that particular character.

maestrowork · Jan 21, 2011

1. Nominative: Who is here? He is here.
2. Genitive: Whom I don't see? I don't see him.
3. Dative: To whom I give? I give to him.
4. Accusative: Whom I see? I see him.
5. Locative: At whom I stand? I stand at him.
6. Instrumental: With whom I talk? I talk with him.

All that is great for the scholars. But all we need to know is him = whom, and he = who.

Simple, isn't it?

Lil · Jan 23, 2011

You know, one of the problems with all these grammar and usage questions is that the most sensible solution is to rewrite the sentence in question. This is not simply to avoid the problem but because if you are questioning the grammar, there will be readers questioning the grammar, even if you are excruciatingly correct. And you want readers paying attention to what you are saying, not to your grammar.

There is never a single way to express something.

Susan Anwin · Jan 15, 2015

context; heroine is talking about info she heard.
the other person asks who she heard the info from
is it "from who?" or "from whom?"

King Neptune · Jan 15, 2015

Susan Anwin said:
context; heroine is talking about info she heard.
the other person asks who she heard the info from
is it "from who?" or "from whom?"

The object of a preposition has to be in the objective case "from whom".

You shouldn't revive old threads for new questions.

Sungoddess · Mar 15, 2015

maestrowork said:
All that is great for the scholars. But all we need to know is him = whom, and he = who.

Simple, isn't it?

That was helpful to me. Thanks!

Chase · Mar 15, 2015

Susan Anwin said:
is it "from who?" or "from whom?"

Since this zombie has clawed its way into the light, another helpful reminder to who/whom questions is following any preposition, the choice is always "whom" or "whomever."

Who/whom

Writer is as Writer does

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Keeping up with the class

Resist. Love. Go outside.

Mostly annoying

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Toughen up.

Fear the Death Ray

Feeling like an old timer

Megalops Erectus

Health writer

Tenacious to a fault

Fear the Death Ray

deep blue electric angel

It Takes All of Us to End Racism