Grammar Friends 6 Answer Key Pdf

[Luciana]

Noticethe gap ("__(i)") in the relative clause. That gap could sorta be filled by the word "them" (in meaning only, though, not physically), and so, that gap has the function of object in that relative clause. And there is a link from that gap to the relative word "who/that/whom", and a link from that relative word to the noun "friends". They are all linked together.

Now, in a traditional grammar perspective, the expected "correct" answer might be the one expecting the relative word "whom", which is in accusative case. Teachers often want that because a pronoun that functions as an object is usually expected to be in accusative case.

Because the relative word is fronted (in front of the relative clause), we native English speakers will very often use the relative word "who" here instead of "whom". The relative word "who" is in nominative case, which is usually the case of pronouns that function as subject in a clause. Since the corresponding gap is not functioning as subject (rather, it is functioning as object), traditional grammars tend to frown on this type of usage.

Some modern grammars (such as the 2002 CGEL) would consider the relative word "that" in your example sentence to be a marker of subordination, not a pronoun. And so, that eliminates entirely the old bogus argument put forth by pedants that the pronoun "that" shouldn't be used to refer to people -- and by the way, the pedants were wrong on that point too.

You can get much better usage info on this topic by using a usage dictionary, such as Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, in their entry on "that". Their info is readable and easy to digest.

If you're in an argument, er, disagreement, with your teacher on this, then you can get some grammatical support from the 2002 reference grammar by Huddleston and Pullum et al., The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL).

Long Answer: As I have said, both are perfectly grammatical. However, there are occasional pedants who will insist that who/whom always be used in reference to people (and sometimes animals) and that/which in reference to inanimate objects. Don't pay attention to them.

But why do some people insist that only who/whom, never that/which, can be used in reference to people? The issue has a long history, which began around the time when Old English was becoming Middle English, when its system of inflection was weakening, when it was losing grammatical gender.

Back in the days of yore, one would never say my friends who...; it was always my friends that.. But the word that had more forms to it, which, at least approximately, allowed there to be a distinction between people and objects. Take the following chart:

There was a time when the words in the column marked masculine were used in place of that for all masculine words, those in the column marked feminine for all feminine words, and so on. However, as you can probably guess, all of these forms converged onto the single word t, which, unsurprisingly, means that. Because that is etymologically neuter, not everyone felt comfortable about using it in reference to human beings. (Ironically, many Old English words for people were grammatically neuter, such as bearn 'child', cild 'child', cwen 'woman', folc 'nation', and so on.) At any rate, people felt compelled to find a word similar to that, but without the connotation of being neuter. For a long time, which filled this gap in the language; most Middle English texts would read the man which, but rarely the man who/that.

But which did not feel sufficiently animate, and so the speakers of English again searched for a new word. This is obvious in that the man which is very rare, if not outright incorrect, in Modern English. Eventually people decided upon who/whom for the job. In fact, who/whom almost so utterly pushed out that that, in many grammars of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, who/whom and which were listed as the proper words to use, with that being considered obsolete. We all know, however, that that was not content to be pushed to the side, as it now seems to be the commonest of the four words.

I am not a pendant and I agree with several others here that in common usage, all of these are used quite freely. Of course, context is always King in these matters. However, to put perhaps a finer point on it, use that/which when it is a person or animal in the performance of an action. Use who/whom when it is a person or animal in relationship to another. For example:

The who/whom are closely associated with identity while that/which are associated with activities. The distinctions between that and which should also be observed. The word that is more characteristic of a direct action, while which (following a comma) is typically an aside.

The series was written to support the syllabus of Family and Friends but is an ideal supplement to any Primary English course. There are lots of controlled activities to help children improve their written grammar.

Children meet new grammar within everyday contexts they are familiar with, such as family or friends of the same age. This means because they know the vocabulary it makes it much easier to concentrate on the grammar.

Jovin operates Grammar Table, a grammar advice and answers station that hit Detroit this week as part of a nationwide road trip. There's an art to language that Jovin is hoping to bring to cities everywhere.

She sat for more than an hour on the sidewalk across from Campus Martius, fielding questions from passersby about the difference between who and whom, or where to use an em dash in a sentence. The night before, she'd set up her table just down the street from the Fox Theatre while the second Democratic debate played out inside.

"What has moved me about this is the idea that interacting with people that you wouldn't normally interact with is a real antidote to the rancor, the animosity that is dominating so many discussions now," Jovin said. "I've had people come up to me with ... hats that indicate they have quite different political philosophies from my own, but we can talk about a sentence."

The two have made a career out of language. They started Syntaxis, a NYC-based company where they train professionals on communication. Jovin has worked in various language fields throughout the years, teaching at New York University and the City University of New York.

As Barath, a 34-year-old PhD student from Maryland, asked when she should use ellipses and em dashes, Jovin wrote out examples on a notepad in front of her. Over a 20-minute conversation, the three bonded over personal punctuation quirks and shared overuse of parentheses, eventually taking a photo together.

"I feel that I know every place that I'm ending up better," Jovin said. "...I would never have the opportunity to talk to some of the people I talk to in New York, because everyone comes up. It's people from all different demographics, different ages."

The two met online through a mutual friend. Moellering, a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University, will sometimes send Jovin sentences and questions from her academic writing. She brought Jovin a semicolon-related question Thursday, and stood near the table for more than an hour, watching Jovin give others advice.

"She's part of my lingual geek network," Jovin said. "Really the internet is so great, because it connects people who have these language interests all over the world, but then, with the table I can actually go places and meet people in real life, and that's what actually makes me happier."

Creative writers sometimes mangle grammar on purpose or get creative with punctuation. At the drafting stage, we keep a dictionary and style manual at hand. When slips are unintended, we count on our copyeditors to catch them.

But at some point, most of us get advice on punctuation or grammar from a friend, relative, or strangers on social media. Sometimes friends or beta readers read our draft and point out what they believe to be errors.

Grammar is the system of a language. People sometimes describe grammar as the "rules" of a language; but in fact no language has rules*. If we use the word "rules", we suggest that somebody created the rules first and then spoke the language, like a new game. But languages did not start like that. Languages started by people making sounds which evolved into words, phrases and sentences. No commonly-spoken language is fixed. All languages change over time. What we call "grammar" is simply a reflection of a language at a particular time.

Do we need to study grammar to learn a language? The short answer is "no". Very many people in the world speak their own, native language without having studied its grammar. Children start to speak before they even know the word "grammar". But if you are serious about learning a foreign language (as opposed to your native language), the long answer is "yes, grammar can help you to learn a language more quickly and more efficiently." It's important to think of grammar as something that can help you, like a friend. When you understand the grammar (or system) of a language, you can understand many things yourself, without having to ask a teacher or look in a book.

Duringmy teaching and tutoring sessions, students would ask me questions thatI had no idea how to answer. I would grope for answers in the books wewere using and babble some kind of unintelligible response that didn'thelp my students at all.

I took a grammar class the next semester, and I made a commitment to study everything until I understood it. Luckily for me, I had an excellent professor. She taught us grammar in a logical order, and she used sentence diagrams.

Since then, I've taught grammar ina graspable, fun way to my own students, and I've made a commitment tohelp other teachers and students who struggle with grammar. I've workedwith hundreds of people, created the Grammar Revolution website, andcreated several courses and books to help people teach and learn grammarin an approachable, interesting, fun, visual way.

3a8082e126