Job Discussion Forums

[johnslat]

Tsk, tsk - using "which" as a relative pronoun describing a person. Can anyone who makes such an error be truly considered "a reliable source?"

Pedantically,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

Are you sure that that is an error? Would you really prefer 'who' instead of 'which'? How about 'that'?

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2749634


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha,

Would you dispute the British Council's dictum?

"We use who and whom for people, and which for things."

http://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/english-grammar/pronouns/relative-pronouns#sthash.ByONnKlo.dpuf

I mean, some things ARE sacred.

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

Sure. But I am not convinced that this dictum is being violated. Or even applies...


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha,

How so?

" . . . person number one — which is President Putin,” Milov says."

It seems to me that "which" refers back to "person number one."

Of course, I suppose it could be argued that Putin isn't really human.

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

Hmmm. For starters, this isn't a defining relative clause, is it? So imagine we substitute 'means' for 'is'. Wouldn't say that's a violation of any BC rules, would you?


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha,

Not defining? How so?

"Definition: A defining relative clause (also called identifying relative clauses or restrictive relative clauses) gives essential information about the noun or noun phrase it modifies, the purpose of a defining relative clause is to clearly define who or what we are talking about. Without this information, it would be difficult to know who or what is meant."

Are you saying that everyone would automatically know who "person number one" is?

Substitution "means" for "is" would result in this:

"without the consent of person number one — which means President Putin,” Milov says.

which would seem to indicate that the speaker felt the need to define just who person number one is.

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

It is not a defining relative clause. At least it doesn't look like one to me.


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

And could you please comment on the example from the link I posted?

"There is only one person left, which is me."

Is this wrong too? 'Who' would surely be quite unnatural here.


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha,

In your example, the "which" refers back to the whole independent clause, "There is only one person left . . ." and not to "person."

It's not the "person" who is "true."

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

But would you say it is correct? And how does it differ from the original sentence that started this discussion?


With Communist greetings

Sasha

[Sirens of Cyprus]

Our father, which art in heaven, says read the articles, don't attack the messenger, and don't hijack the thread.

The Kremlin's new 'new' version of the Nemtsov murder:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/03/18/the-kremlins-new-new-version-of-the-nemtsov-murder/

[Sirens of Cyprus]

The West’s knee jerk reaction

Western leaders do not want to recognize what Putin and his regime are capable of. Scholars John Dunlop and Karen Dawisha have chronicled evidence that the FSB, the state internal security service, was behind the 1999 apartment bombings that killed almost 400 Russians and helped bring Putin to power. English justice will probably conclude that the Kremlin ordered the “nuclear poisoning” of defector Alexander Litvinenko in London, and then sheltered his assassin with parliamentary immunity.

The West’s knee-jerk reaction to the Nemtsov murder was to follow the Kremlin’s lead. By calling upon Putin to find and punish the murderers, the leaders of the West, in particular Barack Obama and Angela Merkel, ruled out a political murder ordered from the highest levels of the Kremlin or Chechnya. They bought hook-line-and-sinker the Putin line that the Kremlin would get no benefit from Nemtsov’s killing. This is wrong. Nemtsov was what was left of the opposition. He still held an elected office and apparently assisted the West in devising sanctions. Of course, he alone could not have unseated Putin, but he was the biggest thorn remaining in the Kremlin’s side.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/03/26/the-nemtsov-murder-investigation-a-battle-of-leaks/3/

[Sashadroogie]

You accuse others of being paid trolls, yet you peddle this noxious propaganda line from the Hoover institute endlessly. What do you really know about anything? Nothing, that's what.

[Dedicated]

I have just returned from 3 months in Moscow, working and researching on a joint project with the Levada Centre, which is a non-governmental polling and research organization. I'm fluent in Russian.

The hostility towards those who criticize the Kremlin is perhaps more intense than at any other time since the fall of the Soviet Union. The assassination of Nemtsov on Feb 27 drove that reality home, further intimidating those few Russians who publicly challenge Putin. Making life harder for them is the broad support the President enjoys, especially among the parts of the electorate that see him as a patriotic wartime leader.

Surveys conducted by the Levada Centre found that 81per cent of respondents had negative feelings towards the US and 71 per cent towards the EU. Only 2 years ago, in March 2013, antipathy towards both the US and the EU was at about 25 per cent.

People now live against the background of the enemies projected onto the TV screens of Russian state TV. This creates a kind of mass aggression which the state can channel quite effectively.

Hardly a week after Nemtsov's murder, Evgeny Fyodorov, a prominent lawmaker in Putin's political party assembled a group of demonstrators outside the US embassy in Moscow to condemn Nemtsov and his allies as puppets of Western influence. A few demonstrators began a chant about Nemtsov and his fellow dissidents shouting ' Purge, purge, purge'.

It was clear from the surprised faces of passersby that for many the word 'purge' is still shocking; the Soviet purges sent millions of their countrymen to die in Siberia's prison camps. The spirit of those dark times, if not the purges Fyodorov demands, is creeping back into Russian life.
Boris' killing is the most dramatic indication that the Kremlin strategy of boosting its political power by demonizing the West is working. Putin cannot back down and things can only get worse.

We'll miss you Boris Efimovich.