1. The WordReference Forums have moved to new forum software. (Details)

Who/whom: ... some or all of <?> are unrelated biologically or legally.

Discussion in 'English Only' started by wizard8451, Sep 3, 2007.

  1. wizard8451 Senior Member

    Mexico
    Mexico, Spanish
    A pair or a group of people, some or all of whom are unrelated biologically or legally.

    Regarding the above example, someone told me that 'whom' is correct because it is the object of the preposition 'of'.

     
  2. Trisia

    Trisia mod de viață

    București
    Romanian
    See here please.
     
  3. wizard8451 Senior Member

    Mexico
    Mexico, Spanish

    I did, but I'm still stumped!
     
  4. wizard8451 Senior Member

    Mexico
    Mexico, Spanish
    I think I would use 'who' in both sentences, because both act as the nomitive pronoun. Is my train of though right?
     
  5. YaniraTfe Senior Member

    Canary Islands, Spain
    español (España)
    Hi wizard!

    Who is a subject pronoun; it is used as the subject of a verb. Whom is an object pronoun; it is never used as the subject of a verb.

    If you can’t get who and whom straight, try this trick: rephrase the sentence to get rid of who or whom. If you find you’ve replaced “who/whom” with he, she, or they, who is correct. If you find you’ve replaced who/whom with him, her, or them, then whom is correct

    Eg.
    There are about one hundred French people on the island, some of who don’t want to leave.
    They don’t want to leave: Subject : some of who :tick:

    There are about one hundred French people on the island, some of whom I know personally.
    I know them: Object : some of whom :tick:

    I’d therefore say that in your two examples “who” should be used, as they are the subject.

    Two adults and their children, all of who may not be from the union of their relationship. :tick:
    (Two adults and their children) They may not all be from the union of their relationship
    Subject: all of who :tick:

    A pair or a group of people, some or all of whom are unrelated biologically or legally. :cross:
    (A pair or a group of people) They are unrelated biologically or legally.
    Subject: all of whom :cross:
    It should be: … some or all of who are….:tick:


    I hope it helps!

    If I’ve said something wrong, please correct me!

    Greetings :)
     
  6. panjandrum

    panjandrum PongoMod

    Belfast, Ireland
    English-Ireland (top end)
    A pair or a group of people, some or all of whom are unrelated biologically or legally.
    Two adults and their children, all of who may not be from the union of their relationship.


    Your examples are not sentences.
    That makes it difficult to work out whether who or whom should be used - even for those who are grammatical experts.
    Well, it mightn't make it difficult for an expert, but it gives me an excuse to duck the question.
     
  7. wizard8451 Senior Member

    Mexico
    Mexico, Spanish
    Two adults and their children, all of whom may not be from the union of their relationship.

    Regarding the above example, someone told me that 'whom' is correct because it's the object of the prepostion 'of''.
     
  8. timpeac

    timpeac Senior Member

    England
    English (England)
    I see the logic of what Yanira has said above, eg

    "there are a hundred people who don't want to leave" so therefore

    "there are a hundred people some of who don't want to leave" but I don't think it works like this in practice.

    I think that in practice the case of "who" follows the more local situation of whether it follows a preposition or not, and so it would be

    "there are a hundred people some of whom don't want to leave".

    This is supported by the fact that there is no doubt you would say

    "we are a hundred people and we don't want to leave" but

    "we are a hundred people and some of us don't want to leave" not

    "we are a hundred people and some of we don't want to leave".

    All the above assumes that we are going to even use "whom". Many people never ever use "whom" in any situation, and so for them it would be "who" in all situations given.
     
  9. panjandrum

    panjandrum PongoMod

    Belfast, Ireland
    English-Ireland (top end)
    Wizard:
    That is still not a sentence.

    If you have a query about who and whom, you need to post a complete sentence. Neither of your original examples were sentences - is there any particular reason why you deleted the first sentence?

    My general expectation following "... ... all of" is whom, not who.
    You may be able to find clear confirmation of that.
     
  10. IrishStar Senior Member

    Dublin
    Italian
    Hello!

    To be honest, now I have got very confused by reading this!! I've always thought that who is used for subject and whom for object. Now, if you say "some of whom" you cannot say "Some of who" because the very presence of of renders the following term an object. In other terms, even by using your trick and replacing who or whom with they or them, I would still say "some of them" and never "some of they" because there is OF.

    Now, is this correct or not?? I might be very wrong, so, please, let me know!
    :)
     
  11. panjandrum

    panjandrum PongoMod

    Belfast, Ireland
    English-Ireland (top end)
    "Use whom after prepositions."
    That clear and unequivocal statement appears in "Improve Your English", Oxford University Press.
    So they didn't have to be sentences after all :)
    ... what follows of is the object of a prepositional phrase, regardless of where that phrase appears in the sentence.
     
  12. YaniraTfe Senior Member

    Canary Islands, Spain
    español (España)
    No, no, I was wrong and you are all absolutely right.

    The preposition makes the difference!

    (Found in Wikipedia) :Use with prepositions

    Whom is the form used when prepositions are involved. Again this is analogous to personal pronouns, for which the objective form is also used after a preposition. For example:
    • For whom have you taken these marvellous photographs? (You have taken these marvellous photographs for him.)
    • With whom are you going to the cinema? (You are going to the cinema with him.)
    • He sent gifts to his granddaughter, of whom he was fond.
    Forms with who in which the preposition does not immediately precede the pronoun are commonly judged acceptable in everyday use, and in spoken use especially:
    • He sent gifts to his granddaughter, who he was fond of.
    Sorry about that! :eek:
     
  13. IrishStar Senior Member

    Dublin
    Italian
    Great!

    Thank you for clearing this up!
     
  14. timpeac

    timpeac Senior Member

    England
    English (England)
    I would say always rather than especially.

    In English two things that are commonly criticised by purists in the language are ending with a preposition and using "who" where "whom" should be used (although both are more common than their "correct" versions of "whom" and "not ending with a preposition". Therefore it would be very strange to do the "colloquial" thing of ending with a prepostion and the "careful" thing of using "whom" at the same time and saying something such as "he sent gifts to his granddaughter, whom he was so proud of".

    Either -

    "he sent gifts to his granddaughter, of whom he was so proud" (supposedly "correct") or

    "he sent gifts to his granddaughter, who he was so proud of" (what 90% of people would say)

    but not a mixture of the two.
     
  15. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    In the expression, "who(m)" is governed by the preposition "of", so according to traditional/prescriptive grammar it should be "whom". However, "whom" is on its way out of the English language in practice, so "who" would not be unreasonable, either.
     
  16. Jekteir New Member

    English - England, and English - US
    But a seemingly unique part of this problem is that 'some of who(m)' can begin a clause in which the who(m) party is the subject.

    I can't help but notice in your examples:

    Took them for him, going with him, fond of her. In all of these, the who/whom party is the indirect object.

    But 'some of who(m)' appears to be somewhat unique in that it is a prepositional phrase whose object will actually be the subject of the next clause:

    "During my degree I have been taught by some exceptional tutors, some of who(m) will be teaching the classes I have chosen as part of my PhD."

    They will be teaching the classes. You could choose to rephrase as:

    "Some exceptional tutors, who will be teaching me again, were previously my teachers also."

    I'm not saying whom is wrong -- it certainly sounds better to my ear after 'some of'. But it is tricky, because "some of who(m) did something themselves" is different from, "some of who(m) we did something to" (forgive me for ending on a preposition, but this is an example only!).
     
  17. panjandrum

    panjandrum PongoMod

    Belfast, Ireland
    English-Ireland (top end)
    I think the critical difference (which hit me rather forcibly round about post #11) is that when you use the phrase "some of <...>", the word <...> is the object of the preposition "of", even if the phrase itself is the subject of the clause.
     
  18. Myridon

    Myridon Senior Member

    Texas
    English - US
    I agree it is always "all of whom." Some of the earlier posts make the point that you can replace "all of whom" sometimes with "they" and sometimes with "them", but no one attempted to replace "all of whom" with "all of they" which should be possible if "all of who" were possible.
    "All of them went to the beach.":tick:
    "All of they went to the beach.":cross:
     

Share This Page