"who" vs. "that"

[Paul Johnston]

Your students are using the oldest extant pattern of relative
pronouns in English, which has persisted in colloquial speech (as
opposed to more formal styles) for centuries in many dialects.  I use
this pattern too in my most casual speech, I think.  In wrirting, or
in more formal speech, relative WH-pronouns pop in, though I'd have
to record myself to see what environments are favored.  Offhand, I'd
say that relative "who" is more common than "which", unless the
antecedent of "which" is a clause, in my speech, and I'd say this use
of "which" might be found in casual styles.  Historically, "which" is
older than "who"--I think Suzanne Romaine studied this way back in
the early '80s.

Paul Johnston

On Jul 26, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: "who" vs. "that"
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
> I believe I mentioned long ago that my undergraduates over a period of
> decades *rarely* used relative "who," in writing or anywhere else.
> "That"
> was the nearly the universal choice.
>
> There was also a very small proportion who used "which" in writing
> (as used
> in the Lord's Prayer), though I never noticed it in their speech.
>
> I now see it rather often on the Net, however.
>
> JL
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Heather Marie Kosur
> <hmkosur at ilstu.edu>wrote:
>
>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> -----------------------
>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> Poster:       Heather Marie Kosur <hmkosur at ILSTU.EDU>
>> Subject:      Re: "who" vs. "that"
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> There is a prescription for who versus that. However, as a
>> prescriptive rule, it is clearly not reflective of actual use. I
>> actually just wrote on this subject in my Hubfolio:
>>
>> http://www.brighthub.com/hubfolio/heather-marie-kosur/articles/
>> 40212.aspx
>>
>> Hope that answers your question!
>>
>> Heather
>>
>> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
>> Heather Marie Kosur
>> Illinois State University
>> Milner Library
>> Processing/Conservation
>> Campus Box 8900
>> 201 North School Street
>> Normal, Illinois 61790-8900
>> (309) 438-5941
>> hmkosur at ilstu.edu
>>
>>
>> Quoting Bill Palmer <w_a_palmer at BELLSOUTH.NET>:
>>
>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>> -----------------------
>>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>> Poster:       Bill Palmer <w_a_palmer at BELLSOUTH.NET>
>>> Subject:      "who" vs. "that"
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>>>
>>> A current Kellogg's Special K commercial claims, "Research shows
>>> women =
>>> THAT eat breakfast have fewer problems with weight" (last few
>>> words may =
>>> not be exactly right, but you get the picture)
>>>
>>> I would have said "...women WHO...", because it just sounds more =
>>> natural.  Are there any "prescriptions" for this?
>>>
>>> Bill Palmer
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using Illinois State University Webmail.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org