0
Usenet Posted 17 years ago
Usage
Who/whom
The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for.
There seems to be no way to make this sentence sound right and be grammatical while only changing one word or only changing one word and moving another.
Posters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
There seems to be no way to make this sentence sound right and be grammatical while only changing one word or only changing one word and moving another.
Posters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
Top answer
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for. There seems ... [/nq] The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
- [nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for.
- There seems ...
- [/nq] The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
- GFH
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
17 Answers
0
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for. There seems ... this sentence sound right and be grammatical while only changing one word or only changing one word and moving another.[/nq]
The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
GFH
The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
GFH
00
(Email Removed), GFH (Email Removed) writes
[nq:2]The older brother should not be spying on the younger ... one word or only changing one word and moving another.[/nq]
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.[/nq]
But "regardless" needs an "of" (somewhere).
Ian
[nq:2]The older brother should not be spying on the younger ... one word or only changing one word and moving another.[/nq]
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.[/nq]
But "regardless" needs an "of" (somewhere).
Ian
00
[nq:1]regardless of whom he's doing it for.[/nq]
"no matter for whom he's doing it."
"no matter for whom he's doing it."
00
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for.[/nq]
It sounds okay to me. You could make it "for whom he's doing it" to get the preposition and its object adjacent, although "of for" is an uncommon pair.
And thinking of another thread, I'm now thinking about how to diagram that.
[nq:1]There seems to be no way to make this sent
It sounds okay to me. You could make it "for whom he's doing it" to get the preposition and its object adjacent, although "of for" is an uncommon pair.
And thinking of another thread, I'm now thinking about how to diagram that.
[nq:1]There seems to be no way to make this sent
00
0
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for. There seems ... in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 7 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years[/nq]
The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
- Avoids the hanging preposition. This might also be acceptable:
The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless for whom he's doing it.
- Avoids the hanging preposition. This might also be acceptable:
00
[nq:2]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for.[/nq]
[nq:1]It sounds okay to me. You could make it "for whom he's doing it" to get the preposition and its object adjacent, although "of for" is an uncommon pair.[/nq]
Yeah, exactly. I guess from my pov, Glenn wins, even though he violated my rules. You know we have strict punishments
[nq:1]It sounds okay to me. You could make it "for whom he's doing it" to get the preposition and its object adjacent, although "of for" is an uncommon pair.[/nq]
Yeah, exactly. I guess from my pov, Glenn wins, even though he violated my rules. You know we have strict punishments
00
[nq:1]violated my rules. You know we have strict punishments for violating[/nq]
The point is, usually, if you have to ask, "How do I use this expression in thus-and-such context idiomatically?" the answer is, "You don't." As Truly Donovan famously put it, real writers rewrite to avoid the problem. Even poor writers like me can learn that.
¬R Q: HOW MANY RIFTS DOES IT TAKE TO ROB PONCHO? A:
The point is, usually, if you have to ask, "How do I use this expression in thus-and-such context idiomatically?" the answer is, "You don't." As Truly Donovan famously put it, real writers rewrite to avoid the problem. Even poor writers like me can learn that.
¬R Q: HOW MANY RIFTS DOES IT TAKE TO ROB PONCHO? A:
00
[nq:2]violated my rules. You know we have strict punishments for violating[/nq]
[nq:1]The point is, usually, if you have to ask, "How do I use this expression in thus-and-such context idiomatically?" the answer is, "You don't." As Truly Donovan famously put it, real writers rewrite to avoid the problem. Even poor writers like me can learn that.[/nq]
I was just kidding Glenn. If you don't w
[nq:1]The point is, usually, if you have to ask, "How do I use this expression in thus-and-such context idiomatically?" the answer is, "You don't." As Truly Donovan famously put it, real writers rewrite to avoid the problem. Even poor writers like me can learn that.[/nq]
I was just kidding Glenn. If you don't w
00
[nq:1]The older brother should not be spying on the younger brother, regardless of whom he's doing it for. There seems ... this sentence sound right and be grammatical while only changing one word or only changing one word and moving another.[/nq]
Defend "while" is the sentence above. Do you not recognize that "by" is the
correct word?
GFH
Defend "while" is the sentence above. Do you not recognize that "by" is the
correct word?
GFH
0
Related Questions