Home » Forum » Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

The man that ...

PotomacBob

"He's the guy that led the team ..." She's the "girl that wasn't willing ..."
These errors, if errors they are, did not interfere with my enjoyment of the story that contained them. But you can bet that Mrs. Higginbotham, sixth grade English teacher, would have downgraded a paper that contained them.
Her rule was that you refer to people and animals with names using the pronoun "who" - not "that." So, if her rule is correct, it should be "He's the guy WHO led the team" (capitalization mine for emphasis). Mrs. Higginbotham also would have made it "Trigger was the horse who Roy Rogers rode into fame." (an animal with a name.)
Is this even an error today? If you consider it an error, is it serious enough to downgrade the score you give a story? (My opinion - it's a minor error not serious enough to make me downgrade a story).

Replies:   awnlee jawking  Argon
awnlee jawking

@PotomacBob

We Brits tend to personify more than Americans so 'He's the guy that led the team ...' sounds unnatural to me. I'd suggest a correction if the author was a Brit, but just suck it up if the author was a colonial ;)

AJ

Replies:   Jim S  Lapi
Jim S

@awnlee jawking

I'd suggest a correction if the author was a Brit, but just suck it up if the author was a colonial ;)

This from someone who can't tell the difference between a french fry and a chip. ;)

Replies:   joyR  awnlee jawking
joyR

@Jim S

This from someone who can't tell the difference between a french fry and a chip. ;)


Untrue..!! He can tell the difference..!!

He (almost) never has a french fry on his shoulder..!!

anim8ed

To be perfectly honest I would not even notice the error. So for myself it is not something that I would reduce the score if for some strange reason I actually noticed.

awnlee jawking

@Jim S

This from someone who can't tell the difference between a french fry and a chip. ;)


This from someone who's never had a chip buttie ;)

AJ

Replies:   karactr
karactr

@awnlee jawking

This from someone who's never had a chip buttie


The question is, why would someone want one? But, then again, I eat chitlins, so there is no accounting for taste.

awnlee jawking

@karactr

But, then again, I eat chitlins, so there is no accounting for taste.


I eat haggis. Does that count?

AJ

Replies:   docholladay  madnige  joyR
docholladay

@karactr

I eat chitlins


I have enjoyed them also, but like many things have a bad reputation.

docholladay

@awnlee jawking

I eat haggis. Does that count?


who knows. I haven't had them to my knowledge so will have to withhold judgement until I get the chance to actually taste them.

madnige

@awnlee jawking

I eat haggis. Does that count?


I prefer Black Pudding - Ecky Thump! Careful you don't die laughing.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
joyR

@awnlee jawking

I eat haggis. Does that count?


Depends.

Yes it counts if you shot your own and ate it. (Wild haggis tastes divine)

No it does not count if you bought and ate the GM modified 'farmed' ones.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
karactr

You can hunt and kill a sheep's stomach stuffed with onion and barley?!? I did not know that.

Replies:   joyR
joyR
Updated:

@karactr


You can hunt and kill a sheep's stomach stuffed with onion and barley?!? I did not know that.


Those fake haggis are only for lowlanders and sassenachs...!!!

Edited to add link

Replies:   Wheezer
awnlee jawking

@madnige

I prefer Black Pudding


I love black pudding. I have it once a week as a 'feel good' food ;)

AJ

awnlee jawking

@joyR

I eat the fake variety sold in supermarkets wrapped in plastic rather than animal intestines. The wild variety isn't found around here.

What's GM modified about the fake variety? I thought GM labelling was compulsory in the UK but the ingredients list doesn't mention it.

AJ

Replies:   joyR
joyR

@awnlee jawking

What's GM modified about the fake variety? I thought GM labelling was compulsory in the UK but the ingredients list doesn't mention it.


It is GM modified because the fake ones are bred in the Grampian Mountains.

Replies:   awnlee jawking  madnige
awnlee jawking

@joyR

It is GM modified because the fake ones are bred in the Grampian Mountains.


:)

Replies:   joyR
joyR
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

Please note that to avoid delicate sensibilities I avoided the issue of exactly how they are modified, suffice it to say that it is inhumane and includes them being forcibly shaved...

Sadly there is little to be done, the authorities, fools all, are still busy ascertaining exactly what is, or is not, to be found beneath a true highlanders kilt.

An utter waste of public money, everyone knows that were you to lift a true highlanders kilt high, all you'd find is 100% highlander... and lipstick.

Of course, obviously if his wife finds lipstick, he will have a lot more than blue balls. If you doubt me, ask Mel Gibson..!!

madnige

@joyR

It is GM modified because the fake ones are bred in the Grampian Mountains.


I thought you were talking about the antipodean ones

Replies:   joyR
joyR

@madnige

I thought you were talking about the antipodean ones


Mere hills, not worthy of being mountains, nor do haggis exist in New Zealand.

Thanks to their presence being exposed in 'Middle Earth' though they survived the books, even the Silmarillion, they were eaten to extinction by the film crews...

Crumbly Writer

Ignoring all the 'chip' discussions and back on topic, the issue is that the 'rules' for when to use 'who' and 'which' are variable. When used in the central part of the sentence (the sentence won't make sense without it's inclusion), you're always supposed to use "that", regardless of the context.

I'd never heard that earlier, and have subsequently found myself stymied is applying the 'proper' terminology. Add in the fact that Word for Windows doesn't give a shit about the little-known grammatical rule, while Word for Mac reject virtually every use of "who" or "which", I find it increasingly ever using the alternate pronouns. :(

I'm still debating dropping the revised rule for using "which" and "who" entirely and sticking to what feels right, but I hate trashing a grammatical rule I con't yet fully comprehend (like the case with "breasting the hill", it just doesn't make sense to me, so I have trouble applying it in my daily usage).

I suspect the 'revised' guideline is based entirely on the new movement to use "that" ALL the time, in virtually every single line. In my case, I work hard trying to eliminate the largely meaningless 'filler' word, as most instances, "that" (when it doesn't refer to a previous usage) doesn't change the meaning of a sentence one iota.

helmut_meukel

@Crumbly Writer

the little-known grammatical rule


Who's rule?
Who is advocating it?

HM.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


but I hate trashing a grammatical rule I con't yet fully comprehend


If you can't find anyone who can explain the rule in a comprehensible way, maybe the problem is that the rule is just plain incomprehensible.

Dominions Son

@helmut_meukel

Who's rule?
Who is advocating it?


English professors, who collectively haven't had a new idea since the sixth century.

Wheezer

@joyR

Those fake haggis are only for lowlanders and sassenachs...!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5yXTBGYbuM

Argon

@PotomacBob

"Trigger was the horse who Roy Rogers rode into fame."


Shouldn't that be "whom"?
🤓

PotomacBob

@Argon

Shouldn't that be "whom"?


Beats me! What I remember is, having watched political conventions on television for decades, that speakers who wanted to place a name in nomination, in introducing the man (in the old days it was inevitably a man), the started each sentence with "the man who" did this thing great, followed by "the man who" did that thing great before they ever mentioned the fellow's name. If they were correct in using "the man who," then why wouldn't it follow that it should also be "the horse who"? (as long as Mrs. Higginbotham was correct that a horse with a name should not be referred to as "that")

awnlee jawking

@Argon

Shouldn't that be "whom"?


No, Trigger is the subject of the sentence.

AJ

Replies:   joyR  helmut_meukel
joyR

@awnlee jawking

No, Trigger is the subject of the sentence.


No. Trigger was Roy Rogers Horse.

helmut_meukel

@awnlee jawking

Shouldn't that be "whom"?

No, Trigger is the subject of the sentence.


Maybe my understanding of English isn't well enough, but if Trigger is the subject of the sentence, then Trigger rides on Roy Rogers.
So it should be "whom". Then it's clear Roy Rogers rides on Trigger.

HM.

robberhands

@helmut_meukel

It depends on who was made famous in this sentence, Roy Rogers or Trigger.

richardshagrin

At Halloween Roy Rogers solicits candy for his horse by saying "Trigger Treat".

awnlee jawking

@helmut_meukel

Trigger is the subject of the sentence, Roy Rogers is the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by 'who'.

AJ

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@awnlee jawking

Trigger is the subject of the sentence, Roy Rogers is the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by 'who'.

Then it should have been 'whom' and Roy Rogers made Trigger famous. I'd argue it's a play on words and Trigger is the subject of both clauses. He rode him into fame = He made him famous.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@robberhands

'Roy Rogers rode' makes him the subject of the verb 'rode', part of the relative clause defining the subject of the sentence, Trigger.

And if I'm wrong, I'll never admit it. Besides, who uses 'whom' these days - it's an archaic affectation ;)

AJ

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@awnlee jawking

And if I'm wrong, I'll never admit it.

Nothing new here, so let's move on.

red61544

The original question and the discussion of food that ensued is why I've stopped eating altogether and now only drink my meals!

Lapi

@awnlee jawking

Wow! You all are sounding like a Frenchman/woman obsessed with Rules of Grammar. We poor colonials do not really care.

In school I never had an English or American teacher for language and they seemed way too picky about the way things we said or written.

Out of school no American seemed to care, that was like 50 - 60 years ago. Now I hear France fines you if you 'no speaka d'a good French', Oui?

Back to Top