Present from KP and Jordan. A corrected proof of "that button" -- the controvertial one, grammatically. Is it "who" or "whom"? I say "who" because the pronoun refers to the subject -- namely "I" -- but there were enough contradictory opinions from smart people that I looked it up at How do you know when to use who or whom in a sentence? and I think I finally know what the problem is.
Aparently one is supposed to use "whom" (the accusative) following a preposition, as well as when the person referred to is the object of the sentence.
Now "for" as in "for who/whom I am" is -- I admit! -- a preposition, but even if that is technically correct it is just too stuffy for Vretla, IMHO, and she is the person being quoted here (in English translation from the Gelack, naturally). Di Mon may have educated her in the niceties of court grammar, but I still think she'd be a "who" person. So I'm sticking with "who" as the right way to go on the following excuse (to quote the yahoo Q&A article):
| The correct usage of these troublesome pronouns is often ignored in speech and informal writing when the word "whom" would sound forced or unnatural. |
posted by Lynda at 14:26
comment? e-mail lynda@okalrel.org
1 comments
> LW,
>
> Let me rephrase my take on that "who/whom" thing for you. I was
> saying that using "who" instead of "whom" after "for" in this case
> is correct, and that "I make no apology for whom I am." should be
> corrected to "I make no apology for who I am." as you are already
> doing. Here, who I am = I am who. I am the one for whom the bell
> tolls = I am who the bell tolls for. It was the way I phrased my
> agreement to your correction that confused you...I think.
>
> AMS, 7.26.06
