0
Jisu98 Posted 20 years ago
Grammar

You are not who you were.

Hello. I really need an answer to this question. Thank you for reply in advance.

My Question is: In the sentence "You are not who you were.", is it correct if I change it into " You are not that you were."?

I learned that I can use relative pronoun 'that' instead of 'who' when it is used as a 'subject' or an 'object'. It looks grammatically ok, but sounds strange. Isn't it?

  

Top answer

I think it is not grammatically wrong, but it just sounds odd.

— Kuljc03

  • I think it is not grammatically wrong, but it just sounds odd.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

4 Answers
0
I think it is not grammatically wrong, but it just sounds odd.
0
0
Jisu98In the sentence "You are not who you were.", is it correct if I change it into " You are not that you were."?I learned that I can use relative pronoun 'that' instead of 'who' when it is used as a 'subject' or an 'object'. It look
0
0
Hello Jisu98

"You are not who you were" is ok; but as has been said, "You are not that you were" sounds a little odd.

It seems to parse thus:

1. You are not that (that) you were.

i.e. "you are not that person that you were".

MrP
0
0
This strikes me as an unusual case of "who" as a fused relative.
"who" acts as both antecedent and relative pronoun. (person who; person that)
"what" can serve that role as well: You are not what you used to be.

"that" cannot be used in a fused relative structure however.
So I would judge "that" incorrect in You are not that you [were / used to be].

0

Related Questions