ATEG Archives

August 2012

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Erin Karl <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 1 Aug 2012 07:21:28 -0700
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2841 bytes) , text/html (2841 bytes)
Exactly, Philip!  


Just thought I'd share a little trick I teach my students (AFTER I've explained the actual grammatical rules of the who WHO/WHOM thing).

You can substitute HE for WHO and HIM for WHOM.

You would say "he had his ear," not "him had his ear."  Right?

It's not fool proof, but it really helps in a pinch!  Of course, if you have students who really understand the functions of a noun clause, you don't need the trick that much ...

Warmest regards,

Erin Karl
Analytical Grammar




>________________________________
> From: Philip Bralich <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] 
>Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 10:11 AM
>Subject: Re: subject of a clause vs object of a preposition
> 
>
>“whoever had his ear” is the noun clause object of “to” and “whoever” is the sujbect of “had”.  
> 
>From:Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martha Galphin
>Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 7:03 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: subject of a clause vs object of a preposition
> 
>Help me with this again, please. I’ve raised this kind of issue before, but I can’t remember your answers. Sorry. I would appreciate your thoughts again. Thank you. 
>
>From a statement regarding King Henry VIII from the Wikipedia article “English Reformation”:
>“. . .he allowed himself to be influenced by his advisors from whom he was never apart, by night or day; he was thus susceptible to whoever had his ear.”
>
>Am I to understand “whoever” is correct because the verb “had” needs a subject, put better, the clause needs a subject, and that that requirement is more important than the preposition “to” requiring an object? 
>
>This is the way I guide myself, but I don’t think I should explain it this way to my ESL students. 
>
>
>
>Martha G. 
>
>PS  Hope the conference was enjoyable and successful.
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list" 
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/ 
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list" 
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2