10.1053, Disc: Query/Discussion: Prep+relative who
LINGUIST Network
linguist at linguistlist.org
Fri Jul 9 21:11:06 UTC 1999
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
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list