Arts Who Knows Whom?
posted by January 29 at 13:42 PM
onI see “who/whom” confusion daily here in the work of otherwise careful writers. So I’m sharing my trick for deciding when to use who vs. whom. It’s an oversimplification for sure, but it works most of the time.
Isolate the clause containing the troublesome “who”/”whom” (or “whoever”/”whomever”); ignore everything else. (Sometimes this means switching word order around. When the word is the object in a question, you may have to restructure the question into a statement, as in example (2) below.)Substitute “him” and then “he” for of the word in question and see which sounds correct.
If “him” sounds better, then choose “whom”—the “m”on the end of both words is your clue. If “he” sounds better, then choose “who” (no “m”).
For example:
1. I want to know who/whom made this mess.
Simplified: Who made this mess/Whom made this mess
he made this mess/him made this mess
“he” is better = “who” is correct2. Eli wants to know who/whom you’d like to see in office.
Simplified: You’d like to see he in office/You’d like to see him in office
“him” is better = “whom” is correct.
The key to correctness lies in the fact that “who” is the subject case and “whom” is the object case, just like “he” is subject case and “him” is object case—which is why this trick works.
Still unsure? This page goes a bit more indepth on the topic, and offers two more tricks to help you get it right. Grammar Girl has a sweet little podcast on who/whom, too.
Comments
Better still, consign whom to the "thee/thou/thine" wastebasket (alongside any other unnecessary pronoun with an archaic King James sound--I'm looking at you, "one") and always use who, which never sounds fussy and is always correct in modern usage.
Agreed! But I love "one".
Boo! Why not just get rid of "him" and "her," too? We could just say "he" and "she" are "always correct" too! So much easier that way.
One might as well use the language correctly, whomever he may be. Degredation in the guise of modernization need not be something up with which one must put.
pwnz0r'd, b1atch!
best comment ever, pox.
Do what you'd like when you're speaking; "whom" is still very much alive in formal written English.
I've read Strunk and White a bunch of times and couldn't make this rule stick. Thank you for the handy trick.
Amy: How about a refresher course on its vs. it's?
This is botched ALL THE TIME, even by intelligent folks.
Hint: it's = it is. Remember learning that in, like, first grade?
Its = the singular possessive.
Segal: Maybe in a few days. I don't think I can get away with too many persnickety posts before people tune me out.
I won't tune you out. I think I'm falling in love with you.
One is reminded of this:
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=12084
Ms. Horn - bless you for this post.
Please add your and you're to the work list, when you have the chance.
Many, many thanks!
Sean, thanks for the example of how "one" is misused. Surely you are the only one whom was reminded of that, but it was a good excuse to reference yourself.
That felt good, I am going to start misusing whom.
One's (my) personal frustration is hearing people meta-accidentally use 'I' for 'me' because one thinks that only ignoramusae say 'me.' But HA! in many cases 'me' is appropriate.
Example: The ociffer, whom was really hot, told Jane and I to get in the car.
The solution, her, is to isolate the clause, then isolate suspect pronoun. What sounds better: "He told me to get in the car" or "he told I to get in the car"?
Problem solved. Thank youm.
one can fuck off.
one jests, obvz.
I'm with #1.
Whom was dying a nice unremarked lazy death and now you want the zombie to walk again and spread its undead grip upon civilization. Drive a fucking stake into its heart. We don't need it( except maybe in the dative case, "To whom are you speaking")
If you have to go through all the rigamorole to figure it out, you don't need it. Just nasty right-wing English teachers and their drooling mind slaves.
SEAN NELSON, EMERITUS, to who, exactly, do you refer?
Who/whom mistakes don't really get my dander up, but I really wish that people could get it through their fucking skulls that "data" and "criteria" are both plurals.
My bitch, that is interesting because that is one mistake that that does not bother me.
Jude,
Come to think of it, I don't think those used to bother me either. Then I became a research scientist and had to hear them used incorrectly multiple times per day for years on end. Like a jackhammer to concrete, it was the repetition that wore me down. Coincidentally I'm no longer a scientist.
If you have to go through all the rigamorole to figure it out, you don't need it. Just nasty right-wing English teachers and their drooling mind slaves.
One (ha) doesn't need to go through "all the rigamorole" after one has learned the correct usage. It becomes second nature after a while.
Political leanings and drooling and slavery have nothing to do with this.
But if it makes you happy to help accelerate the degradation of the English language, keep on fighting the righteous battle. Your team is actually winning.
I see “who/whom” confusion daily here in the work of otherwise careful writers.
Cough. "Otherwise careful writers"? I'm amazed any time I read two consecutive posts sans spelling or grammar issues.
# 1: I love you.
Old-school prescriptivist grammarians: Please, take an Intro to Linguistics class. Beware the hypercorrectionists!
By "here" I meant in my position as copy chief at the paper; I agree that our writers could be more careful when they're blogging.
Eric F, you make me hurt inside. There's a logical reason for every grammatical rule, and if you learn anything about the English language (or a foreign language), it'll be obvious.
I might add that I say this as someone who never studied grammar-- I just read a lot, and if you read decently written stuff, you can tell pretty easily when something sounds right or wrong.
Incidentally, the one I'd like to see treated is the asinine substitution of 'myself' for 'me,' just to sound more intelligent or professional (e.g., please let Johnson or myself know if you have any problems). It just makes you sound like a nitwit.
language change is naturally-occurring, and there is no point in getting one's knickers in a bunch about rules that are on their way out. things only look and sound "right" or "wrong," depending on popular usage. for instance, the perfectly anglo word "rime" looks "wrong" when spelled in a perfectly anglo way, compared to its greek-looking "right" spelling, "rhyme." but it doesn't matter how it's spelled or why. as long as everyone understands me when i write "rhyme."
as much as i love and use it, i'm pretty sure "whom" is on its way out in american english.
As ever, I turn to my American Heritage Third Edition (which once sat upon my messy, messy desk at The Stranger, but after I stopped being the copy editor circa summer 1993) and read, in the usage note under "who": "And though the distinction shows no signs of disappearing in formal style, strict adherence to the rules in informal discourse might be taken as evidence that the speaker or writer is paying undue attention to the form of what is said, possibly at the expense of its substance."
Eric @ 27.
That's what I meant to mean.
I know this thread is dead, but despite my Buffy-the-Whom-Slayer beliefs I want to confess that I just found ANOTHER use for whom that probably ain't going anywhere. I just found myself typing the phrase "a kid for whom math has been a struggle." I can't see using who there but I'm kind of transitional myself.
Opera is also a plural.
No it fookin' isn't. Unless you mean, Mozart's opus no. 2 and opus no. 3, then they're opera.
Mirror @ 28: The art of writing around problems like that is underrated by grammarphiles. Instead of worrying about who or whom in that sentence, you should worry about the whole sentence's clunkiness, and switch it to "a kid who struggles with math." Remember, the active voice is your friend.
Eric @ 31
When I used the phrase "a kid for whom math has been a struggle" I was talking about a specific kid and the time perspective was better. "A kid who has struggled with math" would have worked. Yes. Would have sounded better too and worked better in my sentence because the sentence was long.
UNFORTUNATELY, the Stranger has got me subconsciously thinking about for whom the bell tolls. Dammit.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).