0

"I just saw that guy throw a ball."

"[T]hat guy," the direct object, is now doing the action of "throw[ing]." So, could one ask, "Whom did you see throw the ball?" or should it be "Who did you see throw the ball?"

I would naturally replace "that guy" with "him" if I wished to say it that way, so--assuming that is correct--does that mean "that guy" is always treated as the object despite doing an action?

Sorry if my phrasing is confusing; thank you for any responses.

Edit: This has been marked as a duplicate, but the linked question does not answer mine.

tchrist
  • 134,759
user429547
  • 19
  • The same noun can be the object of one verb and the subject of another in the same sentence. – fev Aug 01 '21 at 13:46
  • 4
    The correct answer is Don't use whom. Ever. That will work in all circumstances. The fact that you have to ask about it means you don't know how to use it, and the same problem afflicts native speakers. So don't get caught. Just refuse to use whom, and go ahead and talk English. – John Lawler Aug 01 '21 at 14:27
  • 3
    The OP's question concerns 1) a clause whose verb has a direct object O and an infinitive complement 2) whether it's "who" or "whom" in a related question. Each of the alleged duplicates addresses 1) or whether it's "who" or "whom" in some different construct, but not the combo of 1) and 2). // You say you would naturally replace "that guy" with "him". So would I. So it's "whom". – Rosie F Aug 01 '21 at 14:54
  • Syntactically, "who(m)" is the object of "see", and thus accusative "whom" is correct, at least in trad grammar. But (sadly?) it's considered very formal nowadays and most speakers would use nominative "who" in your particular example. – BillJ Aug 01 '21 at 15:02
  • Whom did you see? I saw him. Notice how we need an object — a receiver of the verb see — in both cases. Use the objective whom. – Tinfoil Hat Aug 01 '21 at 15:15
  • Also, if you want to "talk English," go ahead and use who — as @JohnLawler says. You'll likely sound abnormal otherwise. But if you want to write English, do seek the correct form. – Tinfoil Hat Aug 01 '21 at 15:19
  • @BillJ Whom are you accustomed to hearing in everyday conversation start spontaneous questions with Whom? Please let us know in case it's contagious. :) – tchrist Aug 01 '21 at 15:26
  • The fact is that when I want to sound snotty, I use whom if required in a sentence. Context is everything, resistance is futile. So, language is a game, and it depends on what game you are playing. Should I provide an example of this particular power game?? :) – Lambie Aug 01 '21 at 16:10
  • 3
    99% of the time, @JohnLawler's position (always use *who) will cover things. But to be "right" 99.9%* of the time or better, just use *whom* whenever it immediately follows the preposition *to* (but nowhere else). – FumbleFingers Aug 01 '21 at 17:16
  • 3
    Also other prepositions. See what happens when you start listing exceptions? Whom is an ex-pronoun. It's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible. – John Lawler Aug 01 '21 at 17:21
  • 2
    @FumbleFingers But be sure to “give a call-back to whoever* just called”* because otherwise it's the wrong case! You can't use whomever after that particular instance of to because there the pronoun is the subject of its clause not the object of to; the entire clause is the prepositional object here and has its own scope internally. – tchrist Aug 01 '21 at 18:33
  • 2
    @JohnLawler If you are reciting a limerick, and the word has to rhyme with Khartoum - then it had better be "whom". – WS2 Aug 01 '21 at 23:05
  • Voting to reopen; pick a different duplicate answer if you must, but this question has little to do with a relative clause construction. – Tinfoil Hat Aug 02 '21 at 04:15
  • Who did you see throw the ball? Did you see who threw the ball? You saw who threw the ball. The issue about the identity of the person who threw the ball being "that guy" or "him" is a red herring, since neither NP is part of the sentence containing the relative pronoun who(m). I'm voting to leave this question closed: I think the answers in the dupe are sufficient, and @JohnLawler's advice here is even more so. – Chappo Hasn't Forgotten Aug 02 '21 at 08:57
  • @tchrist: John's comment was obviously affected by some kind of punctuation / typeface / orthography error. Doubtless what he meant to write was The correct answer is Don't use whomever**. (Ever! :) – FumbleFingers Aug 02 '21 at 10:50

1 Answers1

1

For the sake of illustration, let’s simplify your example and use a pronoun:

I saw him.

You can see that him is an object — the receiver of the verb see. That’s why we use the objective pronoun him rather than the subjective he.

Here’s the question for the answer:

Whom did you see?

Note that the verb see still needs an object — a receiver of the verb. So we use the objective pronoun whom rather than the subjective who.

Linguist Bryan Garner notes that the demise of whom has long been prophesied, but that whom is not dead yet. He continues:

In any event, writers in the 21st century ought to understand how the words who and whom are correctly used.
Source: Garner’s Modern American Usage

If you want to “talk English” (as linguist John Lawler says in the comments above), go ahead and use who. You’ll likely sound abnormal otherwise. But if you want to write English, I suggest — at least for the time being — that you seek the correct form.

Tinfoil Hat
  • 17,008
  • He's asking what to do when the pronoun is the subject of the infinitive clause, the way it is in I saw him throw the ball. There the subject of the non-finite verb is the oblique-case him. – tchrist Aug 01 '21 at 18:41
  • @tchrist: I did not read the question that way. But even so, the bare-infinitive clause has no syntactic subject here; him is not its subject. I saw him. He threw the ball. I saw him throw the ball. He goes away. – Tinfoil Hat Aug 01 '21 at 20:06
  • That's one way to analyse it, but hardly the only way nor always the most useful one. Non-finite clauses always take optional subjects in a different case than finite clauses do. It must be accusative in the case of an infinitive clause but is sometimes also genitive in the case of a gerund clause. I want to see (him throw the ball), I want to see (him throwing the ball), (Him throwing the ball) would be great to see, (His throwing the ball) would be great to see, (For him to throw a ball) is all I want to see. In all those cases, the subject of the non-finite clause is him or his. – tchrist Aug 01 '21 at 20:45