[Closed] Grammar pedants to the forum please.

It should be 'who', not 'that'.

It wasn't Kelly.

Grammar pedants to the forum, please.

Edited. I'm talking out my arse. It's not wrong.

Grammar pedants to the forum please.

Isn't that redundant?

Anyway, surely the correct answer is "was it Kelly to whom you spoke?" 😉

Not if Kelly did all the speaking

You've changed the meaning Jakester.

It should be 'who', not 'that'.

You wouldn't say: "It was kelly that spoke..." you'd say: "It was Kelly who spoke...." so it should be: "Was it Kelly who spoke.....?"

Why, Johndoh? British Council say both are fine.

Michael Swan says we use that instead of who in an informal style.

Was it Kelly who spoke with you?

Would make it more proper.

Grammar crime of the day today in a company presentation "KPInization"

If people could be hung for these crimes, I tells ya ...

If people could be hung for these crimes

Hanged 🙂

Bloody hell. I thought I stopped worrying about relative clauses when I dropped Latin with Mr Street...

Either "That" or "Who" is OK when talking about people.

You wouldn't say: "It was kelly that spoke..." you'd say: "It was Kelly who spoke...." so it should be: "Was it Kelly who spoke.....?"

I'd say either. A quick Google suggests there's no hard-and-fast rule, just preference.

[i]Was it Kelly who spoke with you?

Would make it more proper.
[/i]

Again, only if both parties were speaking. If only Kelly was speaking, that doesn't work.

If people could be hung for these crimes

Hanged 🙂

Perhaps he wanted to nail them to the wall?

'Spoke with you' & 'spoke to you' have slightly different connotations

CaptainFlashheart - Member
Grammar pedants to the forum, please.

You missed the implication of "please."

Grammar pedants to the forum, please[b]?[/b]

I think not. In this instance, I believe that the "please" is an abbreviated form of "if it may please you" or similar.