'that' referring to a person

[Stephen_A]

A student just offered the following.
'Being the brave man that he is, he stepped on the cockroach with his bare feet.'

The student said 'I thought if we are referring to a person, we need to use "who".

Would appreciate any suggestions on how to reply to this. Thanks.

 

[Barque]

In that particular structure, "that" is fine. "Who" wouldn't fit there.

 

[emsr2d2]

Also note that it would be OK without "that" too.

 

[Stephen_A]

Thank you for the replies. The student is not the type who is satisfied with '"that"is right and "who" is wrong.' Appreciate if anyone could give an explanation.

 

[Barque]

We can't always explain why something's wrong.

For example, you know that the correct spelling of the word "wrong" is "wrong" and not "rong".

Can you explain why the spelling "rong" is incorrect? The same answer applies to your question.

Maybe I'm being too simplistic but sometimes the answer is that it's wrong because it's wrong.

 

[Barque]

Ok, I think I can offer an explanation.

"That" refers to the concept of "a brave man". A concept is a thing. That's why you need "that", and not "who". It doesn't refer to that particular man who stepped on a cockroach; it refers to the idea of being a brave man.

(I don't see what's particularly brave about it. It seems more to do with being willing to do something disgusting than brave.)

 

[5jj]

We use only 'who(m)' as a non-defining relative. We can use who(m')' or 'that' for defining relatives.

 

[jutfrank]

I'd teach this as a language pattern:

being the + noun + that + subject + BE

being the great teacher that you are
being the woman that she was
being the person that I am
being the brave man that he is

You can't use who in this pattern, despite referring to a person.

 

[Stephen_A]

Thanks for your replies everyone. This will all certainly help.

 

[probus]

@Stephen_A please check your PMs (messages).