10.1053, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-10-1053. Fri Jul 9 1999. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 10.1053, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            Andrew Carnie: U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: Andrew Carnie: U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Associate Editors:  Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>
                    Brett Churchill <brett at linguistlist.org>
                    Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>

Assistant Editors:  Scott Fults <scott at linguistlist.org>
		    Jody Huellmantel <jody at linguistlist.org>
		    Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Chris Brown <chris at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/


Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Fri, 09 Jul 1999 12:29:13 +0900
From:  gregg at andrew.ac.jp (Kevin R. Gregg)
Subject:  Re: 10.1049, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

2)
Date:  Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:36:48 -0700
From:  "Kaye, Alan" <akaye at Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
Subject:  RE: 10.1049, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 09 Jul 1999 12:29:13 +0900
From:  gregg at andrew.ac.jp (Kevin R. Gregg)
Subject:  Re: 10.1049, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

I hope I'm not duplicating anyone's earlier comment, but while I, too, find
the corpus examples of 'to who' etc. extremely unnatural (while also
finding 'whom' hopelessly stilted), I see nothing at all odd about such
locutions in isolation:
        A:  This paper should be quite useful.
        B:  To who?/Who to?  (cf. ?To whom? /??Whom to?)

        A:   I'm going to complain.
        B:  To who?/About who?/ Who to?/ Who about?   (?To whom?/ ?About
whom?/??Whom to? /??Whom about?)
        where the ? 's simply indicate my naive-native sense of
unnaturalness (middle-aged, West Coast US General American, 20-year expat);
Lord knows I wouldn't use any of them on a bet.




Kevin R. Gregg
Momoyama Gakuin University
(St. Andrew's University)
1-1 Manabino, Izumi
Osaka 594-1198 Japan
tel.no. 0725-54-3131 (ext. 3622)
fax. 0725-54-3202


-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------

Date:  Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:36:48 -0700
From:  "Kaye, Alan" <akaye at Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
Subject:  RE: 10.1049, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who

Wanting to contribute something useful to readers of LINGUIST and the who
vs. whom discussion, I wish to mention that all of this and many
interrelated issues have been taken up in my 1991  "Is English Diglossic?",
English Today 28 (8-14).  My contention was that WHOM survives only in
acrolectic English.

Alan Kaye
Linguistics
CSU, Fullerton
Fullerton, CA 92834

akaye at fullerton.edu


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-10-1053