[LMB] Re: Grammar OT: (was Re: Lois-Bujold Digest, Vol 15, Issue 17)

[Tracy MacShane]

On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 09:05:46 +0300, "Kalina Varbanova" <kikibug13 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/6/06, Eileen McConnell <phoenixargent at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Oooh!  That reminds me!  Using "that" to refer to people sets off my
>> Gramm-o-meter, too, and I see it fairly often.
> 
> Is that actually incorrect? I remember learning that "that" could be
> used both for people and objects; it was using "which" for people that
> was wrong ...

I don't know of the "rule" in this instance - although I'm sure someone does - but I frankly cannot think of an instance where you *wouldn't* use "who" (whom/whose) to refer to a person.

Aha! I found something: http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000255.htm - apparently you can use "that" to refer to a *class* of people. That kind of makes sense, although I would still default to "who" in that instance.