"Who or whom may be responsible"

[nq:1]Seen on NBC News tonight regarding arson fires that might be ecoterrorism, the use of 'whom' in what seems to me to be a plural of 'who': "Who or whom may be responsible"[/nq]
No, this is just a stupid grammatical construction. Just as stupid as "He or him may responsible."

Steve

[nq:2]Seen on NBC News tonight regarding arson fires that might ... a plural of 'who': "Who or whom may be responsible"[/nq]
[nq:1]No, this is just a stupid grammatical construction. Just as stupid as "He or him may responsible."[/nq]
The person who used it may be available on your local news tonight as it might've been an interview not just with NBC News. I'm really pretty sure that the p

[nq:2]"Bill Bonde wrote. No, this is just a stupid grammatical construction. Just as stupid as "He or him may responsible."[/nq]
[nq:1]The person who used it may be available on your local news tonight as it might've been an interview not just with NBC News. I'm really pretty sure that the person was using 'whom' as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
I agree that it appears to b

[nq:2]No, this is just a stupid grammatical construction. Just as stupid as "He or him may responsible."[/nq]
[nq:1]The person who used it may be available on your local news tonight as it might've been an interview not just with NBC News. I'm really pretty sure that the person was using 'whom' as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
How would you say it? 'Who' covers both possibi

[nq:2]The person who used it may be available on your ... as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
[nq:1]How would you say it? 'Who' covers both possibilities.[/nq]
That's the problem. He wanted to say perhaps one person, perhaps a lot of people, committed the arsons.
[nq:1]If you needed to contrast the possibilities of one vs. many, you could say 'what person or persons may be

[nq:1]Seen on NBC News tonight regarding arson fires that might be ecoterrorism, the use of 'whom' in what seems to ... plural although I have heard "Who or whom. . " used before. This side of the pond it's more like:[/nq]
"Who did you ask?" "To whom did you address the question."

From a Rowan Atkinson comedy sketch:
"My aunt, who I live with . . "
The lazy pupil had appended

[nq:1]There's a lot on who and whom on Google . . . qdr=all&q=+%22Who+or %22&btnG=Search Don't click this. Instead, copy and paste this whole URL into an already open IE Address Field. Bear in mind the difference between the UK and US usage though.[/nq]
Aw, go ahead and click, if the link appears in clickable form in its entirety. Bear in mind the differences in capabilities of newsreading s

[nq:2]No, this is just a stupid grammatical construction. Just as stupid as "He or him may responsible."[/nq]
[nq:1]The person who used it may be available on your local news tonight as it might've been an interview not just with NBC News. I'm really pretty sure that the person was using 'whom' as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
"The person or persons who may have been respon

[nq:2]The person who used it may be available on your ... as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
[nq:1]How would you say it? 'Who' covers both possibilities. If you needed to contrast the possibilities of one vs. many, you could say 'what person or persons may be responsible', or 'what person or people'. john[/nq]
Great minds think alike.
Nemo

[nq:2]The person who used it may be available on your ... as a plural of 'who'. How would you say it?[/nq]
[nq:1]"The person or persons who may have been responsible . . " of course. The newsreader may well have been using 'whom' as a plural of 'who.' What matters is that his use of the word in this way was incorrect.[/nq]
It wasn't a newsreader, it was a police or FBI spokesman. He was st