Using "whom of which"

[nygs]

Wow. What a thread.

Let's see where there is still disagreement.

1. Do you agree that "who" and "whom" can both refer to one person or many people?
2. Do you agree that "who" is used for subjects, and the clause is "who get my humor" requires a subject form of the pronoun, ruling out "whom"?
3. Do you agree that "of whom" works with "some of whom" or "all of whom"?

Please try to explain one more time why you think "of which" belongs in there.

Yes, all of whom, would have been much better. lol. Yes, quite the thread. "of which" simply was MEANT to relate to ALL of the people. So that is what I was going after. I do not believe "who" would work. The main question, I guess, is the addition of "of which" and whether it was right to use. I am not seeing any valid points to say that it is incorrect. I was refering to the group of strangers/co-workers as ONE group. But, all of whom, would have been better looking, I guess.

 

[nygs]

Either way, thanks for the feedback everyone.

 

[Barb_D]

I do not believe "who" would work.

Okay, so we still have a problem here.

Who might not get my humor.
Who surely won't get my humor.
Who may all decide I'm the funniest thing since the Marx Brothers.

What word would you use other than "who" here?

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, all of whom, would have been much better. lol. Yes, quite the thread. "of which" simply was MEANT to relate to ALL of the people. So that is what I was going after. I do not believe "who" would work. The main question, I guess, is the addition of "of which" and whether it was right to use. I am not seeing any valid points to say that it is incorrect. I was refering to the group of strangers/co-workers as ONE group. But, all of whom, would have been better looking, I guess.

Are you sure American English is your native language?

 

[nygs]

"who" by itself, would work. I'm refering to the usage of "of which". "who of which", would not work. Which is why I used "whom". So again, "Whom of which, would not get my humor" I think re-wording the sentence would've worked best, but I still don't see how the original does not work. Chalk it up to stubborness. . There are multiple different ways that I could've written that line, but chose that way. I refered to the people in the room as the "of which" part. I didn't use the word group, but meant it to be implied as a roomful of people, i.e. group of people.

 

[emsr2d2]

Yes, all of whom, would have been much better. lol. Yes, quite the thread. "of which" simply was MEANT to relate to ALL of the people. So that is what I was going after. I do not believe "who" would work. The main question, I guess, is the addition of "of which" and whether it was right to use. I am not seeing any valid points to say that it is incorrect. I was refering to the group of strangers/co-workers as ONE group. But, all of whom, would have been better looking, I guess.

"All of whom", "some of whom", or (had "group" been mentioned) maybe "all of which" or "some of which" but there is not a single circumstance or context in the English language where "whom of which" would be correct or appropriate. Not just in your sentence, in any sentence.

 

[nygs]

Are you sure American English is your native language?

As sure as you are obnoxious for putting a comment like that on a forum. Well done, well done. There's always one, who has to be an ass. Always.

 

[SoothingDave]

As sure as you are obnoxious for putting a comment like that on a forum. Well done, well done. There's always one, who has to be an ass. Always.

Don't you mean "There's always one whom of which has to be an ass"?

 

[Barb_D]

You could say "all of which" or "some of which" or "none of which" with "which" referring to the group of the other person's co-workers.

But you need something like all, some, few, none... not "whom" there.

I am completely bewildered why you think "whom of which" makes any sense at all. It's hard to explain why this doesn't work because for everyone else who has commented, it's about as grammatical as "I like these colored pencils, which you gave me, and those of that have lovely colors."

In other words... not at all grammatical and a mystifying choice of words.

 

[nygs]

"All of whom", "some of whom", or (had "group" been mentioned) maybe "all of which" or "some of which" but there is not a single circumstance or context in the English language where "whom of which" would be correct or appropriate. Not just in your sentence, in any sentence.

Justify your statement. Because talking about a roomfull of people is easily implied as a group... whom is used for all the people. Of which, encapsulates the whole room of people. How does it not work? Please explain.

 

[nygs]

You could say "all of which" or "some of which" or "none of which" with "which" referring to the group of the other person's co-workers.

But you need something like all, some, few, none... not "whom" there.

I am completely bewildered why you think "whom of which" makes any sense at all. It's hard to explain why this doesn't work because for everyone else who has commented, it's about as grammatical as "I like these colored pencils, which you gave me, and those of that have lovely colors."

In other words... not at all grammatical and a mystifying choice of words.

Fair enough. Thank you.

 

[nygs]

Don't you mean "There's always one whom of which has to be an ass"?

Wow...

 

[mrsnygren]

Don't you mean "There's always one whom of which has to be an ass"?

Well aren't you clever, SoothingDave. If you have nothing to add to a conversation, why bother entering?

 

[Barb_D]

Okay. Time to close the thread.