still confused...

Originally Posted by Casiopea

A. ...videos of guys that~who were partying
B. ...pictures and videos of you guys that were partying

Sentence A is correct, whereas sentence B is odd. The reason being, the phrase 'you guys' is headed by a pronoun.

Noun + who: Pictures of John who was partying... (OK)
Pronoun + who: Pictures of him who was partying... (Not OK)
In short, 'that were partying' can't modify 'you guys', so it modifies the only noun phrase in the sentence 'pictures and videos, resulting in a strange, unnatural meaning.

1. I'm still confused...Is "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys that were partying like ******* animals" is the same as "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys who were partying like ******* animals"??



2.Is the sentence "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys who were partying like ******* animals" correct or not??

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by wendy

1. I'm still confused...Is "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys that were partying like ******* animals" is the same as "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys who were partying like ******* animals"??

Yes, they are the same. We can use either "who" or "that" to introduce a restrictive (not set off by commas) relative clause referring to a person. We most often use "who" when the person is named or when the person is represented by a close relationship, such as brother, mother, etc. We use either "who" or "that" when the person is represented by a profession or a skill set. With a referent like "you guys", either would be acceptable.

2.Is the sentence "I was on your Web site, and you have some pictures and videos of you guys who were partying like ******* animals" correct or not??

It is technically correct, but it is a but clumsy, because of the referent "you guys". When one comes to "you guys who", one stumbles a bit.