From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Aug 15 1995 - 17:19:21 EDT
At 12:42 PM 8/15/95, Stephen Carlson wrote:
>The English usage of WHO and WHOM is actually relevant to the title of
>this thread...
>
>Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>> At 10:21 PM 8/14/95, LISATIA@aol.com wrote:
>> > By the way, whom do you expect to be the
>> >next president?
>>
>> Honestly (and I don't mean to be in the least bit sarcastic), don't you
>> feel a little bit silly when speaking these sentences aloud, even if not
>> when writing them on paper (or electronic media)? My immediate reaction to
>> hearing or seeing this construction is that the speaker/writer probably
>> learned the construction from Greek or Latin grammar. I really think it is
>> archaic English, and even if it is found occasionally in very formal
>> writing, it surely has something of a Victorian ring to it, IMHO. I know
>> there will be those who disagree with this, but that's what I really think.
>
>I learned the rules to "who" and "whom" in grade school, but I didn't
>understand them until my first year of Latin. The following usage note
>from Mirriam-Webster's Ninth Collegiate Edition is instructive:
>
> Observers of the language have been predicting the demise of
> WHOM from about 1870 down to the present day <one of the pronoun
> cases is visibly disappearing -- the objective case WHOM --
> R.G. White (1870)> <WHOM is dying out in England, where "Whom
> did you see?" sounds affected -- Anthony Burgess (1980)> Our
> evidence shows that no one -- English or not -- should expect
> WHOM to disappear momentarily; it shows every indication of
> persisting quite a while yet. Actual usage of WHO and WHOM --
> accurately described at the entries of this dictionary -- does
> not appear markedly different from the usage of Shakespeare's
> time. But the 18th century grammarians, propounding rules and
> analogies, rejecting other rules and analogies, and usu.
> justifying both with appeals to Latin or Greek, have intervened
> between us and Shakespeare. It seems clear that the grammarians'
> rules have had little effect on the traditional uses. One thing
> they have accomplished is to encourage hypercorrect uses of WHOM
> <WHOM shall I say is calling?> Another is that they have made
> some people unsure of themselves <said he was asked to step
> down, although it is not known exactly WHO or WHOM asked him --
> REDDING (CONN.) PILOT>
>
>This dictionary describes the usage of WHOM to be stilted, especially
>for interrogative use and especially for oral use. This means that
>written usages like <to know for WHOM the bell tolls -- John Donne>
>(i.e., relative pronoun as an object of the preceding proposition)
>is the least stilted.
>
>Interestingly enough, the AV of Mt16:13 shows a "hypercorrect" usage:
>"Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" See also "But whom say
>ye that I am?" (v15 AV). I can't say that 18th century grammarians
>are to blame for this.
>
>Stephen Carlson
Inspired by Stephen's fine research, and thinking to myself there is a
certain relativity to dictionaries and that the Ninth Edition of MWCD is
not the most recent, I betook myself to the pages of the Tenth Edition
(1993), wherein I found Stephen's note on "whom" still present. I then
looked at "who," and found the following:
"used by speakers on all educational levels and by many reputable writers,
though disapproved by some grammarians, as the object of a verb or a
following preposition ('a character who we are meant to pity--TIMES
LITERARY SUPP.).
Yes, there are always those grammarians looking down their noses at us!
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:25 EDT