# To who/whom am I speaking with?



## redwine

Im bit confused! How would I ask for the name of the person Im speaking with?
Is  it, 'Who am I speaking with?' or 'With whom....?' or 'To whom....?' ???
Thanks for any help!


----------



## timpeac

1"To/with whom am I speaking" or 

2"who am I speaking to/with"

Many people will tell you number 1 is the only correct option, in fact it is never said - and would sound odd. I would always say number 2 in all situations.

I am not aware of any particular difference between to/with here - I would say "to" is more common, and certainly what I would say.


----------



## Nick

"Who is this?" is even more common, I think.


----------



## Douglas

timpeac said:
			
		

> 1"To/with whom am I speaking" or
> 
> 2"who am I speaking to/with"
> 
> Many people will tell you number 1 is the only correct option, in fact it is never said - and would sound odd. I would always say number 2 in all situations.
> 
> I am not aware of any particular difference between to/with here - I would say "to" is more common, and certainly what I would say.


 
Hi there,

Since the person with whom you are speaking is the object, the correct way to ask is "With whom am I speaking" or " Whom am I speaking with" Prepositons are preferably not used at the end of a sentence. "To whom am I speaking " is wrong as far as the preposition is concerned. Yet, after you have spoken to the person, you could say" I spoke to Mr or Mrs. X."

Unfortunately, even the anchors are not using whom these days. In French u 
say "La femme que je vois. . " But u say " La femme qui me voit." The Frenchman when asked if he could speak English said: " Bien sur c'est le françaıs malprononcé"! Well he hasn't seen anything yet with all this "I was like, he was like " talk.

Apologies for saying too much.


----------



## te gato

Nick said:
			
		

> "Who is this?" is even more common, I think.


I agree nick;
Keep it simple..."Who am I speaking to?"
Te gato


----------



## Douglas

te gato said:
			
		

> I agree nick;
> Keep it simple..."Who am I speaking to?"
> Te gato


Hi there,
"Who is this," as we all know is grammatically correct. In my day we were first taught to tell who we were and then ask the addressee with whom we were speaking. Of course, everyone is free to speak as one wishes. Free speech!!
But, don't forget, "noblesse oblige"!


----------



## lsp

I don't know... in a work setting I feel like I hear "To whom am I speaking?" or "With whom am I speaking?" all the time when I call businesses and professional offices. Also, "Who, may I ask, is calling?" In more personal situations, of course, it would never be used.


----------



## Edwin

te gato said:
			
		

> ."Who am I speaking to?"



If you are counting votes, I also go with ''who am I speaking to?''


----------



## gaer

Nick said:
			
		

> "Who is this?" is even more common, I think.


 
Or: Who's speaking? Who am I talking to? I would use both when getting calls from tele-marketers.


----------



## gaer

Douglas said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, even the anchors are not using whom these days.


 
According to what I've read this is not merely a recent trend. "Whom" has never been necessary in English for understanding what is said. If you contrast with German, which has "wer", "wen"," wem", corresponding to "who", "whom", "to whom", those endings are very necessary.

There is another problem too.

1) To whom do you wish to speak?
2) Whom do you wish to speak to?
3) Who do you wish to speak to?

I'm using this as an example sentence. It's not quite the same as the one discussed.

The first is completely correct. I would never use it. I think it sounds pompous and outdated, but it is correct. The second is a "hybrid", because it keeps the objective case but splits the infinitive.

The last, I think, reflects how many of us speak, perhaps even most. I would always use the third.

The debate about whether or not "whom" is necessary in many situations is complicated and has been going on a LONG time!


----------



## Edwin

gaer said:
			
		

> Or: Who's speaking? Who am I talking to? I would use both when getting calls from tele-marketers.


When getting calls from tele-marketers, I say, ''I'm sorry I'm not interested.''   Unless I want to pull a Jerry Seinfeld on them and say, ''Please give me your home number and I will call you back at dinner time."


----------



## gaer

Edwin said:
			
		

> When getting calls from tele-marketers, I say, ''I'm sorry I'm not interested.''  Unless I want to pull a Jerry Seinfeld on them and say, ''Please give me your home number and I will call you back at dinner time."


 
Telemarketers (can this be one word?) bring out the very worst in me. Unless I'm in a very good mood, I often hang up and unplug the phone. I HATE them, but it's not fair, because many people doing that job have no choice. I try to remember that.


----------



## Douglas

lsp said:
			
		

> I don't know... in a work setting I feel like I hear "To whom am I speaking?" or "With whom am I speaking?" all the time when I call businesses and professional offices. Also, "Who, may I ask, is calling?" In more personal situations, of course, it would never be used.


 
Hi there,

In the future "whom" may evolve into "who," just like thee evolved into thou and then into you and u don't have to think of 'tutoyer' or 'vousvoyer' since it makes no difference.Wth the little Arabic I know there is only one "ellezi" or "elleti" (masc et fem) for who which is also whom. But, for the present we differentiate between who and whom according to whether it is the subject or object. The fact of the matter is that when asked what is correct, we cannot give an incorrect answer just because popular use may be incorrect. If we give incorrect answers how can we expect to receive correct ones?


----------



## lsp

Douglas said:
			
		

> Hi there,
> 
> In the future "whom" may evolve into "who," just like thee evolved into thou and then into you and u don't have to think of 'tutoyer' or 'vousvoyer' since it makes no difference.Wth the little Arabic I know there is only one "ellezi" or "elleti" (masc et fem) for who which is also whom. But, for the present we differentiate between who and whom according to whether it is the subject or object. The fact of the matter is that when asked what is correct, we cannot give an incorrect answer just because popular use may be incorrect. If we give incorrect answers how can we expect to receive correct ones?


Hi, Douglas. You quoted me, so I guess you are directing this to me. I got a little lost in your post about Arabic and whatnot, but let me clarify mine. I remarked on usage in my experience, without affirming any response to be correct or incorrect. That said, which is incorrect?


----------



## timpeac

Douglas said:
			
		

> Hi there,
> 
> In the future "whom" may evolve into "who," just like thee evolved into thou and then into you and u don't have to think of 'tutoyer' or 'vousvoyer' since it makes no difference.Wth the little Arabic I know there is only one "ellezi" or "elleti" (masc et fem) for who which is also whom. But, for the present we differentiate between who and whom according to whether it is the subject or object. The fact of the matter is that when asked what is correct, we cannot give an incorrect answer just because popular use may be incorrect. If we give incorrect answers how can we expect to receive correct ones?


 
Who decides which is correct and which is incorrect if not the usage of the majority of speakers?

Edit - ah Isp I see you've also made this point. Well said!


----------



## Silvia

I disagree, timpeac, it's not a matter of numbers. If in a class of 30 students, 25 of them write absorbtion instead of absorption, that doesn't mean absorbtion is right.

Language is not an exact science, but not to be diced for either.

Back to the topic, what about the following:
 What's your name, please?
 (Please,) your name is...?
 (And) you are Mr/Ms...?

Do not hesitate to tell me if my suggestions sound stupid


----------



## timpeac

silviap said:
			
		

> I disagree, timpeac, it's not a matter of numbers. If in a class of 30 students, 25 of them write absorbtion instead of absorption, that doesn't mean absorbtion is right.


 
Ok, so when would it become right? When did you start speaking Italian and not Latin? There are no absolutes in language, just accepted norms (and socio-political norms at that). These are even easier to see in matters of vocabulary as in your example since you have a few highly respected dictionaries that "tell" us what is right and what is wrong. It is because there are two or three man-made big English dictionaries that list the word "absorption" and not "absorbtion" which makes it "correct", nothing intrinsic to the word.

It is harder to pin down in terms of grammar. "Whom" is now such an uncommon word that you never hear it - really I'm not exaggerating when I say I cannot remember then last time I head this word spoken by a native speaker. Certainly if anyone used whom in a sentence talking to me I would be very surprised and really notice it.

As soon as I saw this original thread I knew that lots of people would be of your opinion. I have a feeling that many foreigners understand the who/whom difference easily (viz I/me etc - and I agree it is neat and does make perfect sense) and don't quite understand the extent to which "whom" is not used in usual English. Personally, if I were a foreign speaker of English I would avoid "whom" on the basis that almost no native English speaker uses it. The choice is of course yours.


----------



## timpeac

I think it's worth pointing out the the phenomenon of putting a preposition at the end of a sentence goes hand in hand with "who" whereas "whom" goes with not putting the preposition at the end. 

So you can have "to whom am I speaking" or "who am I speaking to" (and I've already made it clear which I would prefer )

But not "Whom am I speaking to" or "to who am I speaking".

By the way, some people will say it is "wrong" to put prepositions at the end of a sentence, but similar to who over whom it is much more common and, to my ears, sounds much more natural.


----------



## beigatti

Akkkk!

As usual, I will disagree with the multitude!

If any of you had Miss Young for 8th grade English grammar (she was 150 years old and taught 1,406,360,567,005 kids) you would "never use a preposition to end a sentence with"    She drilled that into us.  So, in a work situation, I would *never* say "who am I talking to?"  I would say, "who is this please" or "and this is...?"  Even now, I have anxiety ending a sentence with a preposition.

And...I must say that our voice mail at work has our secretary saying "If you know the extension of the party with *whom* you wish to speak, you may enter that extension now".  Most Americans (including newscasters) seem to have forgotten that as an object of a preposition or as the object of a sentence, whom is correct.

Now...if only I could get people to say "it is I" instead of "It's me".   

Jo-Ann


----------



## timpeac

beigatti said:
			
		

> Akkkk!
> 
> As usual, I will disagree with the multitude!
> 
> If any of you had Miss Young for 8th grade English grammar (she was 150 years old and taught 1,406,360,567,005 kids) you would "never use a preposition to end a sentence with"  She drilled that into us. So, in a work situation, I would *never* say "who am I talking to?" I would say, "who is this please" or "and this is...?" Even now, I have anxiety ending a sentence with a preposition.
> 
> And...I must say that our voice mail at work has our secretary saying "If you know the extension of the party with *whom* you wish to speak, you may enter that extension now". Most Americans (including newscasters) seem to have forgotten that as an object of a preposition or as the object of a sentence, whom is correct.
> 
> Now...if only I could get people to say "it is I" instead of "It's me".
> 
> Jo-Ann


 
But when - in all honesty - was the last time the word "whom" passed your lips, Jo-Ann? Can you remember saying it even once during 2004? I certainly can't.


----------



## beigatti

timpeac said:
			
		

> But when - in all honesty - was the last time the word "whom" passed your lips, Jo-Ann? Can you remember saying it even once during 2004? I certainly can't.


 
Next time I say it, I'll e-mail you and let you know! 

Assignment:  Everyone must use the word "whom" at least once today!  

BTW, my youngest daughter, whom I adore, is coming home from college today.

Jo-Ann


----------



## lsp

You know the funny thing, timpeac? I was really asking - not making a point. I was talking about usage, that's true. But the usages I quoted all seemed OK to me ( "To whom am I speaking?", "With whom am I speaking?", "Who, may I ask, is calling?"). 

But this usage question is a tough question for me. I voiced my concerns in another thread when the _number_ of Google results (without any analysis of those results, just the raw number) was used to defend a spelling I knew to be wrong. 

And yet, when did "thee" become "you"? At some point usage does move the language. I don't know how or when it becomes "official."


----------



## timpeac

beigatti said:
			
		

> Next time I say it, I'll e-mail you and let you know!
> 
> Assignment: Everyone must use the word "whom" at least once today!
> 
> 
> Jo-Ann


 
And be completely happy in their own mind that they haven't mis-used it eg

"Whom did you say came?"

or

"Whom is he talking to?"

Which is much worse than just using the horrible word in the first place!


----------



## timpeac

lsp said:
			
		

> You know the funny thing, timpeac? I was really asking - not making a point. I was talking about usage, that's true. But the usages I quoted all seemed OK to me ( "To whom am I speaking?", "With whom am I speaking?", "Who, may I ask, is calling?").


 
I would say, just trust yourself and your own usage. If you have honestly used the word "whom" in a spontaneous spoken sentence (not about grammar or the usage of the word "whom" etc) more than once or twice (if that!) in a 12 month period, then please pass me a hat to eat.

Have you?


----------



## lsp

timpeac said:
			
		

> I would say, just trust yourself and your own usage. If you have honestly used the word "whom" in a spontaneous spoken sentence (not about grammar or the usage of the word "whom" etc) more than once or twice (if that!) in a 12 month period, then please pass me a hat to eat.
> 
> Have you?


Yes. I have to admit.  It slips out occasionally.  My parents were sticklers for rules of all kinds, and grammar almost above all. It used to drive my father crazy that the original Star Trek series had a split infinitive in the opening!

They also insisted on "It is I." My argument for "It's me," was that it sounded better, and that its usage had transformed it into an idiomatic expression. And besides, I persisted... _who cares?!!_ Isn't today's usage as valid a reason to accept what is said as yesterday's rules. Why can science, math, medicine, physical attributes of humans, and all other things evolve and not the rules of grammar. Or is it our laziness and "dumbing down?" I personally haven't decided.


----------



## Nywoe

Well, I know I have  But I am probably just an exception....

Anyway, I was just going to say that you can just say "Speaking?" and thus avoid the whole who/whom, ending with prep., etc. problem.

N.


----------



## timpeac

lsp said:
			
		

> Yes. I have to admit. It slips out occasionally.  My parents were sticklers for rules of all kinds, and grammar almost above all. It used to drive my father crazy that the original Star Trek series had a split infinitive in the opening!
> 
> They also insisted on "It is I." My argument for "It's me," was that it sounded better, and that its usage had transformed it into an idiomatic expression. And besides, I persisted... _who cares?!!_ Isn't today's usage as valid a reason to accept what is said as yesterday's rules. Why can science, math, medicine, physical attributes of humans, and all other things evolve and not the rules of grammar. Or is it our laziness and "dumbing down?" I personally haven't decided.


 
I think the most important thing for all of us to do in this sort of discussion is appreciate firstly that there is no such thing as "correct" English (or French etc). This is not as obvious as it sounds, especially for those of us that have had certain usages drummed into us. Generally accepted usage is always a man-made decision, and almost always an out-of-date one at that.

Having appreciated that aspect, and again personally, I view variations of grammar along very much the same lines as variations of vocabulary, eg formal, colloquial, liable to cause offence etc.

I agree, for example, that you might posssibly hear "if you know the extension of the person with whom you want to speak" in a formal recorded message, but I also know that no one (in my part of the world) seems to use "whom" ever when talking to each other.

That said, I could well imagine avoiding or rephrasing something that would require the who/whom choice - because I could not bring myself to use the word "whom" but equally I would not want someone to judge me as "stupid" or "ll-educated" because they think I don't know the difference (although I really would have to care alot about this other person's opinion to do this). To draw an analogy, I hate wearing suits but I would certainly wear one to a job interview.

Power to the people I say - if the number of people who, for example, wince at "to boldly go" knew that they were simply following a rule made up by one single man (I forget his name) in writing a grammar book a couple of centuries ago then they might be a bit less offended and a bit more surprised that they are taking orders from someone who has been dead quite a while...

Well, I've said my piece now, this is the sort of discussion that can rage forever, since there is no "right" or "wrong" in language just usage and opinion on that usage. I just wish people would bear that in mind more before saying categorically that something is "incorrect". Just ask yourself - according to who? (no pun intended!! I would never say according to whom) If the answer is old Miss Byford who was your 5th grade form teacher, then ask yourself is that really a valid reason not to say it...


----------



## beigatti

Well, I will half agree with you. I think perhaps age has something to do with it. I looked at your profile and see I am old enough to be your mother (you were born a year after I graduated from college). Perhaps it is one of those generational things...(in MY day.....)

I would say "according to whom"...not to be a snob...but that would just flow for me. That's what I learned, just as I learned "between you and me" and "My brother and I are going fishing". In everyday speech I would say "who are you talking to"? In writing or at work I would use who/whom with care. 

I think the other piece of it is my knowledge of a second language. In German, who/whom (wer/wen/wem) is used by everyone. By being conscious of it in German has perhaps heightened my awareness of it in English.

Jo-Ann

PS.  I just checked my e-mail messages.  14 of my inbound messages had the word "whom" and 3 of my sent messages had the word.  The most recent use of mine was "How much does it cost and to whom shall I write the check"?


----------



## gaer

beigatti said:
			
		

> PS. I just checked my e-mail messages. 14 of my inbound messages had the word "whom" and 3 of my sent messages had the word. The most recent use of mine was "How much does it cost and to whom shall I write the check"?


Now, isn't that interesting? I would never write that. I'd write:

How much does it cost and who should I write the check to?[/QUOTE]

I also never write "shall". But your wording appears completely normal for those in the UK, so perhaps there is some influence of that sort on the way you learned to speak as a child. Possible?

I think it's a matter of culture and style, also the people you grew up with (with whom you grew up!), and I do think that Americans in general have almost dropped "who" altogether in speech. Plus there is another factor: do you write in a more formal manner than you speak, or do you tend to express yourself in writing mush as you do when having a conversation?

I tend to write conversationally unless I feel ill at ease.


----------



## gaer

lsp said:
			
		

> Yes. I have to admit. It slips out occasionally.  My parents were sticklers for rules of all kinds, and grammar almost above all. It used to drive my father crazy that the original Star Trek series had a split infinitive in the opening!


That reminds me of my mother who always had a fit over "proven". But I believe it is a Scottish variant and has been correct for many centuries. She majored in English, and I learned a ton from her, but she accepted what she was taught without questioning it, and ultimately I think that causes problems.

As for the split infinitive, ever since I heard that someone had objected to the phrase "to boldly go", I've been on the look-out for similar phrases. It seems to me that if someone wants to condemn this as wrong, he'd have to say that any author who uses it is using sub-standard English, and I think such a person would be on very dangerous ground taking that point of view!


----------



## gaer

timpeac said:
			
		

> That said, I could well imagine avoiding or rephrasing something that would require the who/whom choice - because I could not bring myself to use the word "whom" but equally I would not want someone to judge me as "stupid" or "ll-educated" because they think I don't know the difference (although I really would have to care alot about this other person's opinion to do this). To draw an analogy, I hate wearing suits but I would certainly wear one to a job interview.


I'm laughing SO hard. Because it has to be a life or death situation to get me into a suit, and even then I refuse to wear a tie. I don't own one!

And I'll switch to "super-formal" mode if I sense someone is judging me as ignorant because I'm speaking informally. I also spend a lot of time studying the history of where "rules" come from, and frequently they are nothing more than opinions accepted as the "Word of God" by other people. A great example is the rule about less/fewer, which was originally nothing more than a stylistic preference expressed by a grammarian. I can find the name if anyone is interested. Now people who know next to nothing about English are ready to crucify you if you say, "I hope I made less mistakes today."


----------



## yuli sabetm22

< I have added this thread to a previous thread. 
Please scroll up and read from the top.  Cagey, moderator. >


when I want to know who is the person that is talking with me, i confused what i have to say. "whom am i speaking to ?" or "who am i speaking to?"

Thank you.


----------



## velisarius

Welcome to the forum, yuli! 

Who or whom? It depends how formal you want to sound. I think this usage note from our dictionary may be useful:

 "In natural informal speech, whom is quite rare. _Who were you speaking to?_ is far more likely to occur than the "correct'' _To whom were you speaking?_ or _Whom were you speaking to?"_


----------



## vincix

I know this is a 10-year old thread, but even so:



Douglas said:


> Prepositons are preferably not used at the end of a sentence.


That's a very common and a centuries-old misconception, that prepositions shouldn't be used at the end of a sentence. Very often (and I'm surprised you're not seeing this, as a native speaker, Douglas) English sounds so much better and clear if you end a sentence with a preposition.

"This is the type of nonsense up with which I will not put" (Churchill). Perhaps this is a better way of expressing oneself?


----------



## vincix

And it's good to know that whenever you have a preposition next to 'who', it always become 'whom'. So 'to who', 'with who', these are things to avoid.


----------



## yuli sabetm22

Hi,
So, I think I can't say one of these words wrong right?

"who" more likely occur in informal
"whom" in formal


Thank you for your favourable explanation friends.


----------



## yuli sabetm22

vincix said:


> And it's good to know that whenever you have a preposition next to 'who', it always become 'whom'. So 'to who', 'with who', these are things to avoid.




Hi, base on the explanation above, "to who" and " with who" are things to avoid. is it mean I can use it sometimes?. or is it totally wrong?

Thank you


----------



## Jason_2_toi

Yes, it's totally wrong. You have to say

to whom, for whom, by whom, from whom, with whom.

What is OK, is that in colloquial speech, when you're asking a question, you are more likely to say

Who is this painting by?
Where did you get the money from?
Who is she going to the party with?

Instead of the 'correct', but a bit formal and old-fashioned

With whom is she going to the party? By whom is this painting?


----------



## vincix

Yes, I should have been clearer. That's what I meant to say, it's completely wrong, not that it works sometimes, as you might infer from "things to avoid"


----------



## london calling

vincix said:


> Yes, I should have been clearer. That's what I meant to say, it's completely wrong, not that it works sometimes, as you might infer from "things to avoid"





tonyss said:


> See this one.


Read the other thread too.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I wish people would hesitate to say that forms of words are completely wrong.  It can be terribly misleading.

What's the matter, for instance, with _A girl may experience very different regimes at school according to who is teaching her_?


----------



## vincix

london calling said:


> Read the other thread too.


I have, and there are no more conclusions I can draw from that. What Thomas Tompion says, on the other hand, is quite different, and no one mentions it in that thread.

Indeed, I didn't think of that. It's obviously "who" there, and I think "whom" is even wrong in this case - you don't have the option to choose one or the other, because "who" is in the nominative, it's not an object, the clause is an object clause, and "who" becomes the subject.

"According to whom, the statement is false"
"...according to who is teacher her"

I hope I'm not wrong here.

As far as this is concerned 





> I wish people would hesitate to say that forms of words are completely wrong. It can be terribly misleading.


 I really don't agree, even if they run the risk of getting it wrong. Of course, it depends to what extent this is happening, but I don't agree with the "everything's relative" type of attitude (maybe this isn't what you were "professing"). But this is becoming off-topic, too.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I feel that when you produce a rule, it should be correct.  Otherwise someone who takes you seriously will commit something false to memory.

This is why it's so dangerous, in my view, to use words like _always_ and _never_ when talking about English grammar.


----------

