We've discussed that vs. who at great length on this list, and I've made the argument, based on grammarians like Jespersen and Huddleston&Pullum, that the claim of a distinction of humanness is false.  Relative-that is not a pronoun; it's a subordinating conjunction, the same as it is with noun clauses.  Because it isn't a pronoun, it can't agree grammatically.  Conjunctions in English don't.  "Who," on the other hand, is a pronoun with human reference.  The "that" form goes back to Old English.  The "wh-" forms in their modern form arise in Middle English after the 13th c.

Herb

Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of English
Ball State University
Muncie, IN  47306
[log in to unmask]
________________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of DD Farms [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: January 17, 2009 2:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Pedants that or who?

At 12:38 PM 1/17/2009, Brad Johnston wrote:
>Paulson's Next Stop: Johns Hopkins
>"We are honored to have him coming", said Felisa Klubes, a SAIS spokeswoman.
>DD: Is that now the preferred High Standard English way to go? "him
>coming"? Is it only the ardent pedants that prefer, "his coming"?
>  BJ: pedants that? or pedants who?

DD: I sort of guess it depends on your consideration of the humanity
of pedants.

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/