There are people who..

[Ashraful Haque]

I was talking about India and said that English is one of the official languages in India. And I said:
- "There are people who's first language is English."
- "A lot of people speak English as their first language."

I get confused every time I come across this type of sentences. Please let me know how to form this type of sentence correctly.

 

[teechar]

I was talking about India and [STRIKE]said[/STRIKE] that English is one of the official languages here/there. [1] [STRIKE]in India. And[/STRIKE] I said:
- "There are people [2] [STRIKE]who's[/STRIKE] whose [3] first language is English."
- "A lot of people [2] speak English as their first language."

[1]: Use "here" if you are in India when saying the above. Otherwise, use "there".
[2]: Insert here/there/in India.
[3]: who's is short for who is or who has. It is not the same as the relative pronoun whose.
Note also that the second sentence is slightly different in that it talks about a lot of people.

I get confused every time I come across this type of sentence. Please let me know how to form this type of sentence correctly.

What type of sentence are you talking about? What exactly confuses you? Tell us in detail.

 

[Rover_KE]

I was talking about India and said that English is one of the official languages in India. [STRIKE]And[/STRIKE] I said:

"There are people whose first language is English."

"A lot of people speak English as their first language."

They are both acceptable. They don't mean the same, because the first doesn't include 'a lot'.

 

[Ashraful Haque]

They are both acceptable. They don't mean the same, because the first doesn't include 'a lot'.

I think both of them roughly get the same message across?
Please let me know if I understand it correctly:
- There are people whose....- might be a lot of people, might be just a handful.
- A lot of people.....- means a very large number of people speak English as their first language.

 

[Ashraful Haque]

[1]: Use "here" if you are in India when saying the above. Otherwise, use "there".
[2]: Insert here/there/in India.
[3]: who's is short for who is or who has. It is not the same as the relative pronoun whose.
Note also that the second sentence is slightly different in that it talks about a lot of people.


What type of sentence are you talking about? What exactly confuses you? Tell us in detail.

- Could you please tell me why it is incorrect to use 'in India' in [1]?
- And for [2] I said that after I said English is one of the official languages in India. Doesn't it sound awkward to mention here/there/in India again?

 

[teechar]

- Could you please tell me why it is incorrect to use 'in India' in [1]?

You mentioned "in India" earlier in that sentence. There's no need to repeat it.

- And for [2] I said that after I said English is one of the official languages in India. Doesn't it sound awkward to mention here/there/in India again?

It depends on broader conversation. If it starts as above, then you cannot omit that information.

 

[Ashraful Haque]

[1]:


What type of sentence are you talking about? What exactly confuses you? Tell us in detail.

Sorry I forgot to write about this part. I meant sentences like:
- There are people who would get offended by your opinion.
- A lot of people hate being stuck at home.

I've heard 'a lot of people' being used like this. But I'm not too sure about how natural 'there are people' is. For example:
A: People should stay home until this virus goes away.
B: You know, there are people who are getting frustrated because of staying indoors too long. You should go outside once in a while.

 

[teechar]

Both "there are people" and "a lot of people" are natural and common, and that applies to the sentences you wrote above.

 

[GoesStation]

There are people who X: people who X exist
A lot of people X: quite a few people X.