Showing posts with label who. Show all posts
Showing posts with label who. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 19, 2020

Using "Who" and "Whom"


            Every day brings new examples of English's fluidity. Sometimes the change comes swiftly. Other changes take many years and face much resistance. One change that has been slowly coming is the usage of who and whom. One side declares that whom is dead and that only who should be used. The other side stubbornly insists that whom is still relevant enough to be used in modern English. The question is which side is in the right. Which word should one use in their writing and speech?

            Before we can make a certain decision about these two words, we need to do some research. It is important to understand how to use the words and what their purpose has been in the past. Both who and whom are pronouns but serve slightly different purposes. Who completes several different jobs, but as a pronoun it acts as the subject. As a slight variation, whom is an objective pronoun meaning that who becomes whom when it acts as an object in a sentence. For example, you can say “I asked my friend who gave him the gift.” In this case, who is the subject of the clause "who gave him the gift." However, you can also say "To whom did you give the gift?" Whom is the object in the phrase “to whom.”

            Both who and whom have existed in English since before the 12th century according to Merriam-Webster[1]. They have also seen relatively little change in their meaning. The spelling has gone through a transformation as the language moved into Middle and then Modern English[2]. If anything, these two pronouns have proven a great tenacity. As was the case for many words, grammarians of the 18th century had much to say about their usage. The grammarians of the following century declared that whom was dying out. Unlike with other words, English-speakers largely ignored these grammarians and continued to use both words as they always have.

            That brings us back to our original question. Which word is the correct one to use? The experts of today see it in two ways. One side says that whom is a valid word but is tricky to use. Thanks to the aforementioned grammarians, many English speakers are out of practice concerning the correct way to use it. Therefore, people either avoid the word at all costs or use it everywhere. If one can learn to use the two words in the right context, there is no problem with them.

            However, other experts say that it shouldn't matter. Because people don't understand how to use it, the word should be allowed to die. They believe that who can easily replace its counterpart and clear up the confusion once and for all. Besides, these experts say that whom is pretentious and gives the wrong tone in most forms of writing and speech today.

            Who should we listen to? I honestly believe that it is a matter of personal choice. If you like having separate words, you should use them. Only be careful that you are using them correctly. You'll be doing yourself no favors if you continually use whom in the wrong context. You should also consider tone. Sometimes, whom might be correct but causes a sentence to sound clunky because it doesn't match the tone of the surrounding text. If you're of the party that wishes whom would disappear, using who is perfectly fine. That is part of the beauty of the English language. It is fluid and gives much leeway towards a person’s style and personality.


[1] Merriam-Webster, s.v. “whom,” accessed February 9, 2020, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whom.
[2] Ibid.

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Zombie Rules: The Myths of English Class Part 3


We've finally reached the third and last week about zombie rules. We have covered a lot of ground over the last several weeks. So far, we have discussed why it is perfectly grammatical to use starting conjunctions, ending prepositions, split infinitives, and a passive voice. This week, we will be discussing two more zombie rules that are not quite as black and white. These rules are about contractions and using the word "that."
Everyone at some point has been told not to use contractions in their writing. If we’re talking about "ain't" I would probably agree. But contractions are not grammatically wrong. As I have mentioned before, I enjoy dabbling in other languages. Contractions are a universal construction in language. They are necessary for more than just a shortcut in speech. Contractions aid the smooth flow of sentences and influence the tone of a written piece. Read these next two sentences and compare how they sound. We don't need it anymore. We do not need it anymore. Now, both are correct and would be acceptable to use. The difference comes in how they sound. The sound of "don't need" versus "do not need" is vast. The former has the flow of natural speech and has a personal tone. The latter example has a jarring sound and adds stiffness to the sentence not to mention that it can place a greater emphasis on the “not.”
Don't misunderstand me here. I am not saying that contractions should always be used. As with any grammatical construction, there are certain appropriate uses for it. I only mean to point out that they can create a smoother flow in a sentence and can give a different tone. Contractions don't always informalize sentences either. For example, there are contractions like "'tis" and "shan't" which add a peculiarly classy or literary sound to a sentence. 
Therefore, it is all about what one is trying to say. Contractions are meant to be your friend; a tool to help you better communicate your thoughts. In formal English, the occasional contraction is acceptable if it doesn't disrupt the tone of your document. Informal English benefits exponentially from contractions because of how they give a conversational sound to written English. Moderation is important, but don't be afraid to use contractions in your writing.
The final zombie rule we must cover is using "that" in place of a "who." In English class, students are taught that a "who" is a person and a "that" is an object, animal, or idea. However, how many times have you referred to someone as a "that" lately? You know, the coffeehouse person that hands you your coffee every morning. In that example, the "that" refers to the person who works at the coffeehouse. Is there a difference?
It turns out the answer is both yes and no. The idea that "who" is for people and "that" is for everything else is an oversimplification of a long-standing grammar rule. Truthfully, "who" is reserved for people (most of the time), "which" is reserved for inanimate objects, and "that" is for both people and inanimate objects. Keeping this in mind, the argument over "who" versus "that" becomes more about writing style and preference.
Once we enter the world of writing style, the differences become more apparent. Using "that" for a person is not a problem in most instances, but it can sometimes have a decidedly negative connotation[1]. A writer needs to know exactly what he wants to convey and ascertain that his words do so. On the other hand, "who" can sometimes refer to others beyond people[2]. "Who" is often used to refer to animals, especially dogs and cats[3]. People think of their pets as companions and that is reflected in speech. The best rule of thumb is to use "who" for people and either "that" or "which" for everything else. However, you don't have to worry about slipping because "that" is perfectly acceptable.
We have reached the end of our zombie rule discussion. I hope everyone has learned a lot about writing and the beauty of English. Researching for these posts has certainly taught me much about grammar that I was not necessarily aware of. In the future, use the flexibility of English to communicate better with people and share your ideas with the world. These flexibilities make it easier for an author's voice and personality to come through in his writing. So, go write to your heart’s content and don’t let zombie rules crush your confidence as a writer!



[1] Mignon Fogarty, 2006, “Who versus That,” Quick and Dirty Tips, Retrieved October 11, 2019, https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/who-versus-that?page=1.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.