11–20 of 46 posts
OK, it's not "who you work for" it's "WHOM you work for". Pet peeve of mine, people saying "who" when they mean "whom" - if the "who" is the object of the action "work for" then it is "whom", like "To whom are you speaking?" NOT "Who are you speaking to?" Irks me no end.
As usual, Seth has an incredible grasp of the obvious.
As usual, Seth has an incredible grasp of the obvious.
OK, it's not "who you work for" it's "WHOM you work for". Pet peeve of mine, people saying "who" when they mean "whom" - if the "who" is the object of the action "work for" then it is "whom", like "To whom are you speaking?" NOT "Who are you speaking to?" Irks me no end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've found his posts have been getting better. This one in particular qualifies as the elusive obvious.
Some are gold (the one about his breakfast for instance), but the vast majority are trash.
As usual, Seth has an incredible grasp of the obvious.
I can't tell if that's a compliment or a slam.
I'll give him a compliment, because whilst this advice maybe obvious, it is extremely difficult to follow, and it is useful. IMO that makes it a worthy post.
I have followed this advice once, and it was really tough to do, but ultimately I'm very glad I did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some are gold (the one about his breakfast for instance), but the vast majority are trash.
He isn't always right, but experience has taught me that he is more often right than wrong.
It's much more impressive when you're right when everyone else (at the time) thought you were wrong.
OK, it's not "who you work for" it's "WHOM you work for". Pet peeve of mine, people saying "who" when they mean "whom" - if the "who" is the object of the action "work for" then it is "whom", like "To whom are you speaking?" NOT "Who are you speaking to?" Irks me no end.
I believe it's neither. Both end the sentence in a preposition, 'for'. If you want to be accurate (which I guess you do, since you posted) then it is "for whom you work".