3 ms·
Hope this helps: "[T]his distinction applies only to which and who. The alternative that is found with both human and non-human antecedents." http://en.wikipedi
by tuukkah 15y ago
Hope this helps: "[T]his distinction applies only to which and who. The alternative that is found with both human and non-human antecedents." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_relative_clauses#Human_or_non-human http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_relative_clauses#Human_...
- irahul 15y agoThat's news to me. Language follows speakers, especially influential speakers, and the list of speakers using that for human antecedents includes Shakespeare and Mark Twain, so I guess it's all right now, even if it were an error at some point(grammar isn't static - it has been changing ever since it came into being). Now I am wondering about why I thought that isn't to be used for human antecedents. Was it an error earlier or it changed recently? If it was an error earlier, Shakespeare using it doesn't fit.
- ellyagg 15y agoYou probably thought that because it's uncommon in good writing and you're taught not to do it. It's probably against style guidelines for major newspapers, for example, and it sounds elegant to educated native writers.