Results 1 to 10 of 10
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • American Samoa
      • Current Location:
      • Hong Kong

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 68
    #1

    Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Hello,

    Should I use who or whom in this sentence construction?

    There are five conservative judges on the Supreme Court, whom were all appointed by Reagon and Bush, and four liberal judges.

    There are five conservative judges on the Supreme Court, who were all appointed by Reagon and Bush, and four liberal judges.

  1. emsr2d2's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 41,843
    #2

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ulysses View Post
    Hello,

    Should I use who or whom in this sentence construction?

    There are five conservative judges on the Supreme Court, whom were all appointed by Reagon and Bush, and four liberal judges.

    There are five conservative judges on the Supreme Court, who were all appointed by Reagon and Bush, and four liberal judges.
    If you want to keep the word order the same, then you would say "who were all appointed".

    If you want to use the word "whom", then you would say "There are five conservative judges on (in?) the Supreme Court, all of whom were appointed by Reagan and Bush......"

  2. Banned
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Hungarian
      • Home Country:
      • Hungary
      • Current Location:
      • Hungary

    • Join Date: Feb 2010
    • Posts: 1,121
    #3

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    they were appointed
    who were appointed

    'whom' is incorrect.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • American Samoa
      • Current Location:
      • Hong Kong

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 68
    #4

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Thanks, yeah all of whom does sound better than who were all but I don't want to cut it into separate sentences.

  3. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,218
    #5

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    It's still one sentence and "all of whom" reads much better indeed.

    However, say Reagan OR Bush, not AND Bush. (And you should probably specify which Bush).
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

  4. Banned
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Hungarian
      • Home Country:
      • Hungary
      • Current Location:
      • Hungary

    • Join Date: Feb 2010
    • Posts: 1,121
    #6

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    'Reagan and Bush' is ambiguous. It can mean these:

    1. one part of whom was appointed by Bush and another part of whom was appointed by Reagan
    2. Reagan and Bush jointly appointed all of them

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • American Samoa
      • Current Location:
      • Hong Kong

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 68
    #7

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Yes I agree, it technically is one of them appointing the judges.

    If I ever use whom with the verb appoint, it always means the appointee or the person who will get appointed right?

    So I would use who like:

    The Prime Minister appoints judges who share the same viewpoints as the prime minister because judges who share the same views as the Prime Minister.

    and I would use whom like:

    Whom to appoint.

  5. emsr2d2's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 41,843
    #8

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ulysses View Post
    Yes I agree, it technically is one of them appointing the judges.

    If I ever use whom with the verb appoint, it always means the appointee or the person who will get appointed right?

    So I would use who like:

    The Prime Minister appoints judges who share the same viewpoints as the prime minister because judges who share the same views as the Prime Minister.

    and I would use whom like:

    Whom to appoint.
    You only use "whom" after a preposition:

    I have 3 cousins, of whom 2 are girls.
    I have an uncle, from whom I receive a birthday card every year.

    And yes, I missed the point about the 2 presidents in the original question. It should indeed say "Reagan OR Bush".

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Dec 2009
    • Posts: 6,332
    #9

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    Quote Originally Posted by emsr2d2 View Post
    If you want to keep the word order the same, then you would say "who were all appointed".

    If you want to use the word "whom", then you would say "There are five conservative judges on (in?) the Supreme Court, all of whom were appointed by Reagan and Bush......"
    ***** NOT A TEACHER !!!

    Good afternoon, emsr2d2.

    Thought you would like to know that in the United States, "on" is probably the preferred preposition.

    From an article in today's edition of one of our most important newspapers:

    to fill the latest vacancy ON the Supreme Court

    to build consensus ON a court that

    All nine sitting justices ON the court came from

    Thank you.

  6. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,218
    #10

    Re: Who were all appointed vs Whom were all appointed.

    And ironically, I've thought more about the Reagan and vs. Reagan or issue, and I think we may get away with "and" because between the two of them, they did the appointing.

    These cookies were all made by kfred and barb.... we didn't necessarily work together, right? We may have each made a few dozen? But we can say "These cookies, all of which were made by kefred and barb, were the most popular at the bake sale."

    So I'm changing my vote - either or OR and works. We get wiser as we get older, even if it's only by a few hours.

    (However, you still would probably want to say which Bush. Was the elder in office long enough to appoint anyone?)
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

Similar Threads

  1. indicated, appointed, recommended?
    By jctgf in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 31-Aug-2008, 22:49
  2. get appointed, get confirmed
    By sureshfina in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15-Jul-2008, 06:26
  3. difference between complement and object
    By Grace-Ellen in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 14-Jun-2008, 08:02

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •