tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post3619844475925202965..comments2024-03-27T19:11:37.620-04:00Comments on You Don't Say: For whom, the bell tollsJohn McIntyrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03559687583130468871noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-87522684085657152352010-04-28T01:49:58.026-04:002010-04-28T01:49:58.026-04:00Alice is quite right. That it makes sense as well...Alice is quite right. That it makes sense as well as good grammar only makes those who want to split hairs, split hairs. Bonum est.Patricia pressanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-73238610325542668542010-04-26T12:47:13.412-04:002010-04-26T12:47:13.412-04:00Whom is not dead. It is not even breathing heavy. ...Whom is not dead. It is not even breathing heavy. One day, we all shall be gone, of course. But whom will live on beyond us and there is nothing we can do about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-55892176816320973922010-04-26T01:11:56.963-04:002010-04-26T01:11:56.963-04:00The Crooked straight and the rough places PLAIN, n...The Crooked straight and the rough places PLAIN, not smooth. Try to sing "smooth" over several eighth notes - Handel knew how to set text. When I wore braces (in my thirties) I called that the "Orthodontist Aria.")Patricia the Tersenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-76362838359070377432010-04-25T03:41:08.545-04:002010-04-25T03:41:08.545-04:00I agree with Patrick K. Lackey's statement. If...I agree with Patrick K. Lackey's statement. If the word goes, I will definitely miss it. Then again, I'm said "pretentious fool," who corrects his whos and whoms after misspeaking. But I don't do so out of pretension; rather, it's an automatic reaction like hitting the delete key after a typo.enjayemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06944791551072075450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-71852376626137773792010-04-24T10:21:38.482-04:002010-04-24T10:21:38.482-04:00"Confusion of who and whom has a long pedigre..."Confusion of who and whom has a long pedigree, with each appearing as both subject and object in Shakespeare’s works..." Citing Shakespeare's texts as any sort of authority on usage, grammar, or spelling is weak support. His manuscripts were handwritten, collated, and edited heavily only later after his death (1627-28). He hardly ever spelled his own name the same twice in a row. Standards had just not been invented yet and wouldn't come into practice for another hundred years. It's a "so what" argument.Richard Burbagenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-61495210947847243102010-04-24T00:58:04.832-04:002010-04-24T00:58:04.832-04:00To Whom it May Concern:
If whom is useless, then &...To Whom it May Concern:<br />If whom is useless, then "between you and I" is OK, right? Wny not let's all just be consistently sloppy, all around? I'm constantly amazed that descriptivist editors weep over their profession's demise, while they simultaneously decry the same rules that make their very existence such a necessity. You can't have it both ways: if you want gatekeepers, you have to put them in charge of the keys. They can't drop the keys down the well and go drinking in the sun, hoping their jobs will still be there when they sober up.Eastabrook Kefauvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-28526661485853193222010-04-23T21:04:22.103-04:002010-04-23T21:04:22.103-04:00I don't use "whom", ever. Why and wh...I don't use "whom", ever. Why and when should I?Daniel Simshttp://redswirl.1up.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-22873740672368741042010-04-23T16:14:42.351-04:002010-04-23T16:14:42.351-04:00To: Becki
Your version of my example is an improv...To: Becki<br /><br />Your version of my example is an improvement. When writing carefully, I try to audition each word to see if it merits inclusion in my prose. I didn't subject "whom" to a tough enough audition. The word contributed nothing to the sentence. Zilch!Patrick K. Lackeynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-1048385485073948812010-04-23T13:12:22.918-04:002010-04-23T13:12:22.918-04:00Mark Davies' Corpus of Contemporary American E...Mark Davies' <a href="http://www.americancorpus.org/" rel="nofollow">Corpus of Contemporary American English</a> returns 245,185 hits for "who" in speech and a mere 4,576 for "whom," for a ratio of nearly 54 to 1. In the corpus as a whole, there are 1,022,848 instances of "who" and 37,969 of "whom," for a ratio of 27 to 1. Of those 37,969 instances of "whom," 24,491 follow a preposition, which is about 65 percent. <br /><br />So I wouldn't exactly say that it's rare except after a preposition, but it certainly isn't terribly common.Jonathonhttp://www.arrantpedantry.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-87875926215810093442010-04-23T13:10:00.768-04:002010-04-23T13:10:00.768-04:00Sorry I called you Patricia, Patrick!Sorry I called you Patricia, Patrick!Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11537256399190903813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-46020730551339721252010-04-23T13:10:00.769-04:002010-04-23T13:10:00.769-04:00To: Patricia K. Lackey (and others who care)
Ins...To: Patricia K. Lackey (and others who care)<br /><br />Instead of saying "She is the woman (who,whom) he saw flying the kite" and making more work for those of us addicted to mentally correcting EVERYONE'S grammar, why don't we say, "She is the woman he saw flying the kite"?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11537256399190903813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-55067161478657670212010-04-23T13:02:56.292-04:002010-04-23T13:02:56.292-04:00"Whom won't be missed." Are you kidd..."Whom won't be missed." Are you kidding me??? Classicists around the world are crying at the thought. <br /><br />I have, in fact, taught (this very day) my Latin I students about relative clauses, and very happy showed them how they can relate the English pronoun whom with the Latin form very easily -- and how much sense it all makes.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16444813279789243921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-75393115104035681912010-04-23T12:55:37.611-04:002010-04-23T12:55:37.611-04:00I forgot to mention: nice use of the comma in your...I forgot to mention: nice use of the comma in your title, effectively responding oh so subtly to some of the comments on your previous post (or one of them in particular, anyway). Well played!Sharon Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09093606285505207973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-27098971112127849632010-04-23T12:50:11.710-04:002010-04-23T12:50:11.710-04:00I am certain that the objective use of both "...I am certain that the objective use of both "who" and "whom" will continue to coexist peacefully for a long time--speakers and writers of English have many choices, and as long as we exercise them, we will continue to have them. We are blessed with a delightfully polyglot language! At least, I think so.Sharon Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09093606285505207973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-67138476390689044872010-04-23T12:13:09.498-04:002010-04-23T12:13:09.498-04:00A speaker seeking to choose on the fly between who...A speaker seeking to choose on the fly between who and whom often has to know what will come after the who or whom. For example, if one says, "she is the woman," the question of whether who or whom should follow woman depends on what comes after the who or whom. It might be, "She is the woman who flew the kite," or "She is the woman whom he saw flying the kite." The speaker can't make his choice of who or whom until his mind skips ahead to see what's coming. Usually one can choose the right word simply by knowing which words came before. It's harder choosing the right word based on what will follow. A writer, of course, can choose the wrong word, then notice as he types the rest of the sentence that the word is wrong. No harm is done, since the writer can replace the wrong word with the right one before anyone else sees the error. A speaker who realizes that he said "who" when he should have said "whom" will be thought a pretentious fool if he corrects himself, unless he is attending a convention of copy editors.<br /><br />One also has to think ahead in choosing the verb tense in a question. "Is the boy guilty?," or "Are the boys guilty?" Still, choosing the right verb tense in a question usually is easy. Choosing who or whom may require furrowing one's brow. People hate to think. (Someone said that people will love you if you make them think they're thinking but will hate you if you make them think.) So whom may well be doomed. If the word goes, I'll miss it.Patrick K. Lackeynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-76796650511054510702010-04-23T12:05:33.344-04:002010-04-23T12:05:33.344-04:00I should have saved the 2½ pages of comments about...I should have saved the 2½ pages of comments about the object clause you mention in 2. After two decades, I am vindicated! At the time, I suspect the opponents merely acquiesced, which I attribute to my lack of eloquence. But I was right.MichiganCityDDShttp://www.twitter.com/MichiganCityDDSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-55799110058684667482010-04-23T11:39:07.940-04:002010-04-23T11:39:07.940-04:00Yes. Good eye.Yes. Good eye.John McIntyrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03559687583130468871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-45814116362012423762010-04-23T10:34:07.758-04:002010-04-23T10:34:07.758-04:00I tuned in to see whether you had acknowledged Wil...I tuned in to see whether you had acknowledged Will's birthday. You did, and for that I thank you. <br /><br />But did you mean "appearing" in that sentence?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11537256399190903813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-86505465377025869652010-04-23T09:46:05.829-04:002010-04-23T09:46:05.829-04:00the crooked straight and the rough places smooth
...<i>the crooked straight and the rough places smooth</i><br /><br />And now I'm going to have that music from Messiah in my head all day.<br /><br />However, more mundane to this discussion, I couldn't agree more with piece of advice number 1. In language, as in many things, it is better to lead by example than by critique.Abigail C.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6051744883907551402.post-74100832911732342672010-04-23T09:24:55.090-04:002010-04-23T09:24:55.090-04:00Language AND geology in the same post! Bestill my ...Language AND geology in the same post! Bestill my heart!Cailinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371931937825074414noreply@blogger.com