Posts: 3,964
Threads: 629
Joined: Jul 2024
Ammo wrote:
Is this rule simply a convention, or does serve a useful function?
Well, all of English usage is simply a convention. In this case, it's a bit of redundancy to help clarify the meaning of the sentence, which can be interpreted two different ways. The same rule is normally used to distinguish whether
that or
which is proper.
If the clause
who I consider friends can be omitted without changing the writer's meaning, it's a parenthetical phrase that simply adds a bit of side information. Thus it should "stand alone," and
whom becomes the object of the verb
consider.
If the clause is necessary to the sentence's meaning—I only visit
friends among the residents—then it modifies (enhances the meaning of) the sentence's main structure. Using the ordinary nominative case
who clarifies this for careful English speakers
who still distinguish the two forms.
^^^see what I did there? It's a clause necessary to the meaning of the sentence, so no comma and
who.
Posts: 1,383
Threads: 115
Joined: Jan 2024
Use "the who/whom trick."
Just substitute he/him/they/them for who and whom, and that will tell you whether to use who or whom. The steps below make this look harder than it is.
Start by stripping the sentence to its essentials:
"I am visiting some residents who/whom I consider friends."
Pull out the clause: Who/m I consider friends.
Invert it to make it stand alone: I consider who/m friends.
Substitute they and them for who and whom: I consider they friends (NOOOOOO!)
I consider them friends (YESSSSS!)
Correct answer: Use whom. Restore the sentence order. You get:
"I am visiting some residents whom I consider friends."
Put back in the extra stuff from the original sentence:
"You will see me on occasion visiting some of your residents whom I consider friends."
There is only one item of grammar you need to know: The grammar inside a clause (e.g., "whom I consider friends") is independent of the rest of the sentence and acts as if it is a single, self-contained unit. "Who" and "whom" inside the clause are not changed by the rest of the sentence, only by their function inside the clause.
Thus you can have: Whoever ate my cookie left crumbs.
And: I will punish whoever ate my cookie.
...Because "whoever ate my cookie" governs its own grammar as a self-contained unit and can be the grammatical equivalent of either "he" or for "him."
My tuppence. Hope it makes some cents.
Posts: 68,347
Threads: 17,223
Joined: May 2025
to WHOM in this forum are you addressing the question.......???
Posts: 3,964
Threads: 629
Joined: Jul 2024
what4 wrote:
Use "the who/whom trick."
Just substitute he/him/they/them for who and whom, and that will tell you whether to use who or whom.
But in the OP's case, it isn't clear whether the clause is meant to stand alone, or to modify the object (
residents) of the main clause.
Posts: 28,821
Threads: 209
Joined: May 2025
samintx wrote:
[quote=cbelt3]
Whom or that I
Spell checkers are not the equivalent of a fourth grade ruler wielding grammarian / dominatrix .
I like "that I". thanks for the advice. Whom sounded right to me but THAT I sounds better!
Who/whom is considered to be the correct usage due to the fact the phrase references people and not things.
Posts: 5,344
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
who versus whom and restrictive versus nonrestrictive are independent issues. It should be whom either way.
Posts: 41,899
Threads: 3,655
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
5
It's a good thing cbelt didn't close the thread after posting.
