"Whom"?
-
-
it was the occasion of a debate with the copyeditor
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Hopefully a debate over severance
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
they are technically correct! [who] is the object here. ('Xi Jinping Knows Him' not 'Xi Jinping Knows He.') But I overruled it on grounds of, you know, sounding really weird.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
No, they're wrong even on the technicality. But this is an embedding thing that I don't know the right term of art for, need to bring in a linguist to correctly name it
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
you may be right - pronouns in a dependent clause function according to the role in the clause, not the sentence.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I didn't learn this stupid language to be wrong about it!
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I'm genuinely torn because I can't decide exactly how who functions here tho.
@bokane?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer @Pinboard and
Gotta be "who," unless you also think "whom is it?" and "come on, tell me, whom is it? I know you know whom it is" are grammatical
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bokane @BeijingPalmer and
The weird thing about this is that it looks like a hypercorrection toward something that resembles normal idiomatic usage ("It was him" rather than the unbelievably tight-assed "it was he")
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
It looks like sanity has prevailed, although the Twitter thumbnail still shows evidence of the crimepic.twitter.com/KEu4A1NFTE
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.