Is 'who' here a relative word or an interrogative pronoun?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
(1) That's a big part of who I am.
(2) When that day comes if you don't like who you are, you're done.
At first blush, the who's in (1) and (2) seem to be relative words in the fused construction.
CaGEL* (Page 1077), however, seems to say that both these are interrogative pronouns. Specifically, CaGEL says this:
...
An example of the free choice construction is:
Invite who you like.
And I don't think the boldfaced expression in (1) or (2) is the free choice construction.
Does this mean that the who's in (1) and (2) are interrogative pronouns?
EDIT
Here's what CaGEL (Page 1076-77) says about 'how' marginally occurring in a fused relative:
Examples with how are found but they are rare and quite marginal:
%We will not change how we use future contracts during the term of this Prospectus; %I don’t like how it looks.
These examples are construed by CaGEL as possible -- admittedly marginally so -- cases of how occurring in a fused relative.
Now, returning to example (2) above, I don't know why you don't like who you are should be interpreted differently than I don’t like how it looks. That is, if the latter's how is construed as a fused relative word, albeit marginally, then why shouldn't the former's who be?
*The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston & Pullum
relative-clauses questions
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
|
show 17 more comments
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
(1) That's a big part of who I am.
(2) When that day comes if you don't like who you are, you're done.
At first blush, the who's in (1) and (2) seem to be relative words in the fused construction.
CaGEL* (Page 1077), however, seems to say that both these are interrogative pronouns. Specifically, CaGEL says this:
...
An example of the free choice construction is:
Invite who you like.
And I don't think the boldfaced expression in (1) or (2) is the free choice construction.
Does this mean that the who's in (1) and (2) are interrogative pronouns?
EDIT
Here's what CaGEL (Page 1076-77) says about 'how' marginally occurring in a fused relative:
Examples with how are found but they are rare and quite marginal:
%We will not change how we use future contracts during the term of this Prospectus; %I don’t like how it looks.
These examples are construed by CaGEL as possible -- admittedly marginally so -- cases of how occurring in a fused relative.
Now, returning to example (2) above, I don't know why you don't like who you are should be interpreted differently than I don’t like how it looks. That is, if the latter's how is construed as a fused relative word, albeit marginally, then why shouldn't the former's who be?
*The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston & Pullum
relative-clauses questions
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
1
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
1
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
1
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
1
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48
|
show 17 more comments
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
(1) That's a big part of who I am.
(2) When that day comes if you don't like who you are, you're done.
At first blush, the who's in (1) and (2) seem to be relative words in the fused construction.
CaGEL* (Page 1077), however, seems to say that both these are interrogative pronouns. Specifically, CaGEL says this:
...
An example of the free choice construction is:
Invite who you like.
And I don't think the boldfaced expression in (1) or (2) is the free choice construction.
Does this mean that the who's in (1) and (2) are interrogative pronouns?
EDIT
Here's what CaGEL (Page 1076-77) says about 'how' marginally occurring in a fused relative:
Examples with how are found but they are rare and quite marginal:
%We will not change how we use future contracts during the term of this Prospectus; %I don’t like how it looks.
These examples are construed by CaGEL as possible -- admittedly marginally so -- cases of how occurring in a fused relative.
Now, returning to example (2) above, I don't know why you don't like who you are should be interpreted differently than I don’t like how it looks. That is, if the latter's how is construed as a fused relative word, albeit marginally, then why shouldn't the former's who be?
*The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston & Pullum
relative-clauses questions
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
(1) That's a big part of who I am.
(2) When that day comes if you don't like who you are, you're done.
At first blush, the who's in (1) and (2) seem to be relative words in the fused construction.
CaGEL* (Page 1077), however, seems to say that both these are interrogative pronouns. Specifically, CaGEL says this:
...
An example of the free choice construction is:
Invite who you like.
And I don't think the boldfaced expression in (1) or (2) is the free choice construction.
Does this mean that the who's in (1) and (2) are interrogative pronouns?
EDIT
Here's what CaGEL (Page 1076-77) says about 'how' marginally occurring in a fused relative:
Examples with how are found but they are rare and quite marginal:
%We will not change how we use future contracts during the term of this Prospectus; %I don’t like how it looks.
These examples are construed by CaGEL as possible -- admittedly marginally so -- cases of how occurring in a fused relative.
Now, returning to example (2) above, I don't know why you don't like who you are should be interpreted differently than I don’t like how it looks. That is, if the latter's how is construed as a fused relative word, albeit marginally, then why shouldn't the former's who be?
*The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston & Pullum
relative-clauses questions
relative-clauses questions
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
edited Apr 25 at 15:37
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
asked Apr 25 at 11:26
JK2
13611651
13611651
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
1
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
1
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
1
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
1
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48
|
show 17 more comments
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
1
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
1
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
1
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
1
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
1
1
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
1
1
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
1
1
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
1
1
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48
|
show 17 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
-3
down vote
"Who" is a relative pronoun, not an interrogative pronoun. A relative pronoun is used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun. Who, in fact, is one of the most common relative pronouns. An example is - "The driver who ran the stop sign was careless."
References - https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/pronouns/relative-pronoun.html
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
-3
down vote
"Who" is a relative pronoun, not an interrogative pronoun. A relative pronoun is used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun. Who, in fact, is one of the most common relative pronouns. An example is - "The driver who ran the stop sign was careless."
References - https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/pronouns/relative-pronoun.html
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
-3
down vote
"Who" is a relative pronoun, not an interrogative pronoun. A relative pronoun is used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun. Who, in fact, is one of the most common relative pronouns. An example is - "The driver who ran the stop sign was careless."
References - https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/pronouns/relative-pronoun.html
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
-3
down vote
up vote
-3
down vote
"Who" is a relative pronoun, not an interrogative pronoun. A relative pronoun is used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun. Who, in fact, is one of the most common relative pronouns. An example is - "The driver who ran the stop sign was careless."
References - https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/pronouns/relative-pronoun.html
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
"Who" is a relative pronoun, not an interrogative pronoun. A relative pronoun is used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun. Who, in fact, is one of the most common relative pronouns. An example is - "The driver who ran the stop sign was careless."
References - https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/pronouns/relative-pronoun.html
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
answered 4 hours ago
Happy Shah
31
31
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Happy Shah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
add a comment |
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
1
1
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
“Who” can be either a relative pronoun or an interrogative pronoun.
– sumelic
4 hours ago
1
1
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
This is quite obviously not accurate, and this kind of over-simplified, basic grammar link is certainly in no way an adequate answer to a question displaying this level of detail and sophistication.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f443384%2fis-who-here-a-relative-word-or-an-interrogative-pronoun%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
(1) and (2) are interrogatives. "Who" – unlike what” or “whoever” – cannot normally occur in the fused relative construction, except in the 'free choice' construction, which they are not -- note also that you can't say *"Who I am is none of your concern". The meaning of (1) for example can be glossed as "That's a big part of the answer to the question 'Who am I?'"
– BillJ
Apr 25 at 13:36
1
@BillJ You say you can't say Who I am is none of your concern, but I've found a few examples in Google Books: goo.gl/UscBdV Are these all ungrammatical?
– JK2
Apr 25 at 15:20
1
@BillJ Thanks for confirming that with your earlier comment. Still, CaGEL does think of I don’t like how it looks as having a fused relative construction. And I believe it's the context outside the embedded fused relative/interrogative construction** that determines the nature of the embedded construction. Then, how can you don't like who you are in (2) be said to include a different construction (i.e., interrogative) than I don’t like how it looks?
– JK2
Apr 26 at 9:24
1
@Araucaria What do you mean by "his analysis of That's a big part of who I am"? As far as I know, CaGEL doesn't have as an example who I am as a complement of a preposition of. Moreover, in that blog post, GKP clearly states, "in Can I help who's next? we have a fused relative construction: it's the object of help." Similarly, in you don't like who you are, who you are is the object of like, which I think means that we have a fused relative construction in (2).
– JK2
May 2 at 11:58
1
@Araucaria That who's next in Can I help who's next? "would always be interpreted as an interrogative" is just beyond me, if that's really what you're saying. GKP himself has painstakingly differentiated Can I help who's next? from interrogative uses such as I wonder who's next.
– JK2
May 2 at 12:48