Who versus Whom?

Chemical Burn

Do you know the difference? Do you use them? I do, in speech, text and facebook chat. I get told off for it by my OH and she says no one uses them :P well, fellow boardsies ?? Do you?

I hear professionals and ignorant people alike, and nothing makes my skin crawl more than some pleb misusing who and whom. RTÉ presenters often omit the proper usage of whom. What kind of a sick world are we living in, people?

HeidiHeidi

Yep.

But I'm a sad grammar nazi.

Latchy

There are people on boards who absolutely love these type threads OP ,they are called grammar Nazis and one or a dozen will be along shortly I'm sure .

GreenWolfe

You may want to request access to Spell Czechs.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055859481

Yes to all of your questions in the OP

You missed the "I don't know the difference but I am willing to learn"

I'm this option.

The King of Moo

I know the difference (basically, "who" refers to the subject of a clause, "whom" to the object: it's actually fairly simple), but always use "who." There's no confusion created by using it in place of "whom."

Eh? Clause? Object? I'm still lost Moo. You may have to start at junior infants level with me :P

crockholm

Honestly,no,I don't. Would you be willing to help a doofus like me. I will call you sensei.

Chemical Burn

The King of Moo wrote: »

I know the difference (basically, "who" refers to the subject of a clause, "whom" to the object: it's actually fairly simple), but always use "who." There's no confusion created by using it in place of "whom."

Exactly this !!! A true fellow linguist fan

Who = Nominative

Whom = Dative and Accusative

Whose = Genitive !!!

Irish_wolf

I don't know the difference and I don't want to know or use them

As far as I'm aware it's like this

you use whom anywhere you could use him,
use who anywhere you would use he.

Probably have that wrong though.

Chemical Burn

Irish_wolf wrote: »

As far as I'm aware it's like this

you use whom anywhere you could use him,
use who anywhere you would use he.

Probably have that wrong though.

Correct

crockholm

Chemical Burn wrote: »

Exactly this !!! A true fellow linguist fan

Who = Nominative

Whom = Dative and Accusative

Whose = Genitive !!!

Those clauses I only remember from learning German, but never had their relevance to English explained.:(

Feck sake Chemical Burn, you less help than the King of Moo!

Irish_wolf - To whom it may concern = To him it may concern ????

The King of Moo

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Eh? Clause? Object? I'm still lost Moo. You may have to start at junior infants level with me :P

Basically, in a sentence or clause (part of a sentence), the subject does the action, and the object has the action done to them.

For example: I (subject) talked (verb in the past simple form) to John (object).

Now imagine that the previous sentence is the answer to a question. There are two possible questions that could produce that answer.

A subject question, using "who:" "Who talked to John?"
"I did."
Here, we're looking for the subject, the person who did the action, so we use "who."

An object question, using "whom:" "Whom did you talk to?"
"John."
Here, we're looking for the object of the action, the one on the receiving end, so we use "whom."

As I said though, there's never really any confusion caused by using "who" to refer to an object of an action, so it's ok to use it in place of "whom."

stevenmu

Meh, whom cares?

shopaholic01

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Feck sake Chemical Burn, you less help than the King of Moo!

Irish_wolf - To whom it may concern = To him it may concern ????

Who is that?/Who are you?

For whom the bell tolls/To whom it may concern

Chemical Burn

crockholm wrote: »

Those clauses I only remember from learning German, but never had their relevance to English explained.:(

Clauses, Declensions, Cases same thing, different name

The King of Moo

Irish_wolf wrote: »

As far as I'm aware it's like this

you use whom anywhere you could use him,
use who anywhere you would use he.

Probably have that wrong though.

That's a good, simple way to remember it. "He" is another subject pronoun, like "who," "I," "they" etc. and "him" is an object pronoun like "whom," "me," "them" etc.

mattjack

Wasn't there a programme on the telly box years ago called Doctor Whom ? or was it Doctor Who ?

Three Seasons

Mit wem muss Ich Essen.

Chemical Burn

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Feck sake Chemical Burn, you less help than the King of Moo!

Irish_wolf - To whom it may concern = To him it may concern ????

"To" is a preposition, hence goes into the Dative case, as with most Romance and Germanic languages.

crockholm

Deutsches wein,mag ich nicht.

Latchy

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Who is that?/Who are you?

For whom the bell tolls/To whom it may concern

Exactly and so obvious to .Like who's going start a letter with '' Hey you...whoever you are '' ?

Feathers

I don't know the difference and I don't want to know or use them

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Irish_wolf - To whom it may concern = To him it may concern ????

You'd say "It may concern him" rather than "It may concern he" - works as a rule of thumb.

shopaholic01

Latchy wrote: »

Exactly and so obvious to .Like who's going start a letter with '' Hey you...whoever you are '' ?

Dear Sir/Madam if in doubt. :pac:

catallus

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/for-whom-the-bell-tolls/309266/

An interesting read there on the subject.

As banal as the subject appears to be it is vital that we don't allow our language to be undermined: from Confucius to Darwin to Koestler and Orwell; there is usually some debate about the minutiae of grammar, but they exist for a reason; so that we can communicate what we think and any actions taken which limit our ability to do so should be fought against. To possess the ability to translate what we think into what we say is the mark of civilisation.

Who said that?
Whomever said that is talking out of their arse!

Am I doing it right?

The King of Moo

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Who said that?
Whomever said that is talking out of their arse!

Am I doing it right?

The second one should be "whoever," as it refers to the person doing the action (saying).

If you're not sure which to use, think about what' the sentence's action is (every sentence has to have a verb), who or what is doing it, and who or what is having it done to them, if the sentence has an object.

That's why we say "To whom it concerns."

The construction is unusual, but the verb is "concerns," the thing doing the concerning is "it," and the person who is the object of this concerning is "whom."
So a question would be: "Whom does this concern?"

Two more quick examples:
John is the person who talked to Mary (John did the action).
Mary is the person whom John talked to (Mary was the object of the action).

He said that
he is talking out of his arse
=> who

King Moo is the Garda who arrested Strawberry Milkshake.
Strawberry Milkshake was the person whom Garda Moo arrested.

?

Should that be "is the person" or "was the person" or does it just depend on the timing of the arrest?

Ps: I like learning I do

The King of Moo

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

King Moo is the Garda who arrested Strawberry Milkshake.
Strawberry Milkshake was the person whom Garda Moo arrested.

?

Spot on! Gold star for you!!





Now come on there, move along!!

*Strawberry Milkshake shoves hand in front of RTÉ camera on the way into court*

The King of Moo

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Should that be "is the person" or "was the person" or does it just depend on the timing of the arrest?

Ps: I like learning I do

In this case you could you really use both, but strictly, it's better to use "is" (present simple), because even though the action referred to is in the past, you're still that same person now.

Using "was" would suggest that you're now a different person (Strawberry Milkshake was the person Moo arrested, but now she [I'm guessing!] is someone else), but of course no-one would actually make that mistake, and your meaning would still be clear. Using the past simple form of "arrested" tells the listener/reader that the action happened in the past, so you don't need to use "was" to indicate that.

I should point out, in case people think I'm just incredibly patronising, that this is literally my day job.

shopaholic01

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

King Moo is the Garda who arrested Strawberry Milkshake.
Strawberry Milkshake was the person whom Garda Moo arrested.

?

Should that be "is the person" or "was the person" or does it just depend on the timing of the arrest?

Ps: I like learning I do

The King of Moo wrote: »

Spot on! Gold star for you!!
We need a new forum - 'Intricacies of the English language', HMod: The King of Moo.





Now come on there, move along!!

*Strawberry Milkshake shoves hand in front of RTÉ camera on the way into court*

We need a new forum - 'Intricacies of the English language', HMod: The King of Moo.

An English language forum would be a great idea and I second Shopaholic01's motion for HMod.

But before I head to feedback, I'm off to google the words Chemical Burn used lol

Kinski

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

An English language forum would be a great idea and I second Shopaholic01's motion for HMod.

But before I head to feedback, I'm off to google the words Chemical Burn used lol

There you go, knock yourself out.

shopaholic01

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

An English language forum would be a great idea and I second Shopaholic01's motion for HMod.

But before I head to feedback, I'm off to google the words Chemical Burn used lol

It's like 'tip the can' all over again! :pac:

Three Seasons

I actually love grammar.

Kinski

Kinski wrote: »

There you go, knock yourself out.

Ooooh, just the place for my assumption/presumption confusion!

Thank you

BUBBLE WRAP

I know the difference and use them appropriately

I just always use "who". Apart from Yahoo. Then it's "hoo".

BUBBLE WRAP

I know the difference and use them appropriately

Three Seasons wrote: »

I actually love grammar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRsPheErBj8

The King of Moo

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Ooooh, just the place for my assumption/presumption confusion!

Thank you

They're basically interchangeable nowadays, and there's actually a lot of debate about their respective meanings, but the most-commonly held difference is that an assumption is purely hypothetical, with no basis in evidence, whereas a presumptions is based on some evidence or pre-existing knowledge.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgt8-oy8wkI

feargale

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Dear Sir/Madam if in doubt. :pac:

Suppose I'm neither a knight nor a brothel manager.

Dear Citizen? Dear human?