Is "whom" a good word to use in general? Can someone

What the fuck do you think this website is, your personal grammar teacher? Fuck off and look it up on google.

if you would use him/her, use whom; if you would use he/she, use who

don't use it colloquially or you'll come off as an autist

whom is when it's used as an object

"To whom did you give the ball?"

who is when it's used as a subject

"Who threw the ball at Jeffrey?"

At least that's how I think it works. Now if I could only figure out when to use which/that

>>9554866
Whom'st've is much better

>>9554866
"whom" = used where "him" would be used
"who" = used where "he" would be used

File: woman parrot.jpg (27KB, 475x320px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 475x320px

>>9555201
nah, the object in this sentence would be the ball. Whom would be the indirect object in the sentence.
You (subject) gave the ball (object) to him (ind. object).
Whom (I think) is used when you are asking about and indirect object or a question asking by, with, from.
Example:
By whom, with whom, from whom, to whom, for whom.

When you are asking about a regular subject or object "who" is used.
Who are you? (who is subject)
Who did you see that day? (who is dir. object)

Whom is not a good or bad word, it's just a grammatical case of the interrogative pronoun.

>>9556283>>9555201
>>9554866

if you know about latin cases:
Nominative: who
Genitive: whose
Dative: whom
Acc: who
Ablative: whom

>>9554881
>trying this hard

I prefer "Whom's'td"

File: 1475409212677.jpg (1MB, 4030x4096px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4030x4096px

>>9556407
Whom've'llntstly

>>9556409
Impressive. Very nice.

>>9556287
'Whom' is usually the accusative, too. E.g., 'Whom did you hit?' I think there's some slight variation here, but it doesn't matter since 'whom' is archaic and only used by stipulated rules anyway (i.e., it's not part of a native speaker's grammar of English, so all 'rules' about how to use it contemporarily are made up).

>Now if I could only figure out when to use which/that

The purported rule is: 'that' for restrictive relatives, 'which' for non-restrictive relatives, e.g.:

(1) The dog that took the ball ran off.
(2) tTe dog, which took the ball, ran off.

(1) asserts that a certain individual, which is both a dog and took the ball, ran off. (2) asserts that a certain indivdidual, which is a dog, ran off, and it further has a 'secondary' or 'not-at-issue' assertion that this individual took the ball.

The distinction is real, and marked by intonation and subtle semantic differences regarding what is asserted versus what is conveyed without being asserted directly. 'That' can't be used for non-restrictive relatives:

(3) *the dog, that took the ball, ran off.

Your English teacher will tell you that 'which' can't be used for restrictive relatives, but it's probably actually alright (though 'that' is preferred):

(4) ?the dog which took the ball ran off

>>9554866
I am epic-levelgrammarteacher123, I will teach you my ways for only 50 dollars an hour. Let me know OP

>>9556255
>"whom" = used where "him" would be used
>"who" = used where "he" would be used


I cannot tell why He, whom angels worship

It was he whom we visited yesterday