In the world of Twitter and texting, "whom" is archaic, a grammatical anachronism. In other words: Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for "whom."
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — To whom it may concern: We’re not all that concerned with the proper use of “who” and “whom” anymore.
Oh sure, it was important to Ernest Hemingway when he wrote “For Whom the Bell Tolls” more than 70 years ago. We still teach “whom” in high school and use it as a salutation in letters to unknown recipients. And we might drop an “Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee,” misquote of a John Donne poem into casual conversation.
But, you know, whom really cares, right?
In the world of Twitter and texting, “whom” is archaic, a grammatical anachronism. Even the Hallmark Channel, a division of the Kansas City company that made its fortune with words, is giving up. Hallmark is promoting the Oct. 20 premiere of an original movie: “I Married Who?”
- Live updates from May Day in Seattle: Anti-capitalist protesters clash with police
- Good news about coconut oil, melatonin and turmeric
- Visitors trash Washington island, so officials shut it down for good
- Oregon QB Vernon Adams to attend Seahawks rookie mini-camp on a tryout basis
- Pro Football Focus breaks down the final five Seahawks' draft picks
Most Read Stories
It should be “I Married Whom?” The people at Hallmark Channel know this. They just doesn’t care. There’s a good reason.
“I Married Whom?” sounds stupid. It’s not colloquial. It’s not … natural.
Cut to preposterous movie scene:
(A knock at the door.)
“Who is it?”
“It is I, Reginald. Thou truly wast in thy cups last night, Catherine, but didst thou realizeth thou wedded the court jester?”
“Zounds! I married whom?”
See? Stupid. Or at least cringingly British.
Michelle Vicary, the Hallmark Channel’s executive vice president of programming, said the title for “I Married Who?” needed to be fun, conversational and “relatable” to reflect the movie’s contemporary story, about a bride-to-be, a Vegas bachelorette party and an inadvertent marriage to a movie star.
Make it too stilted and nobody watches. In other words, ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for “whom.”
You won’t find “whom” on many, if any, Hallmark cards.
“Greeting cards are about what people want to say to each other, so they have to reflect what’s going on in the culture and the language,” said spokeswoman Linda Odell.
Even some grammarians understand “whom” is dying. One wrote the following on the Language Log blog:
“Whom is like some strange object — a krummhorn, a unicycle, a wax cylinder recorder — found in Grandpa’s attic. People don’t want to throw it out, but neither do they know what to do with it.”
Kevin Day still teaches the proper usage of “who” and “whom” in his International Baccalaureate English classes at Sumner Academy in Kansas City, Kan.
But, come on. Does it really matter?
“I think it’s a matter of knowing your audience,” he said. “In informal speech a lot of us — even English teachers — lapse into all sorts of informalities. But when you’re writing an essay for a professor or an article for publication, it behooves you to follow every rule that you can. Because of the nature of your audience, those people are going to be judging you for every little punctuation mark and every grammatical mistake.”
Even Day acknowledged that “whom” is whistling past the grammar graveyard.
“It’s likely that eventually it will die out,” he said. Why is “whom” dying? Beyond sounding stuffy, it’s hard for many to understand when to use it.
Here’s the general rule: Use “who” when it is the subject of a sentence or clause — the one taking the action, as in “Who loves you?” Use “whom” when it is the object of a sentence or clause — the recipient of the action, as in “Whom do you love?”
See the problem?