Proofreading Service - Pain in the English
Proofreading Service - Pain in the EnglishProofreading Service - Pain in the English
 

Your Pain Is Our Pleasure

24-Hour Proofreading Service—We proofread your Google Docs or Microsoft Word files. We hate grammatical errors with passion. Learn More

 

Username

Dennis Hodgson

Member Since

October 2, 2011

Total number of comments

2

Total number of votes received

7

Bio

Latest Comments

Never mind whether one uses ordinal or cardinal numbers in dates. To my ears, "September 11th" sounds daft, implying as it does that there have been ten previous Septembers (cf. Henry VIII, Pope Benedict XVI). "11th September" is clearly an abbreviated form of "11th day of September" and thus makes more sense.

What happened to who, whom and whose?

  • October 2, 2011, 4:29am

What I want to comment on is not the substitution of "that" for "who/whom" but the substitution of "that" for "which" in defining relative clauses, now distressingly common. I don't mind that usage changes over time, except when changes are being driven by ignorance, which is usually the case nowadays. This link expands on these points. http://dennishodgson.blogspot.com/2010/04/relatively-incorrect.html