# EN: who / which, that  - for animals



## Jessila

Hi,

here's my sentence:
_"_ _such as female wolves for instance *who*/*which* only mate with the male perceived as the strongest and most dominant one of the pack." _

I first used "who" then I thought than maybe it was inapproriate for animals so I switched to "which" but not fully convinced.
I googled "the wolf who was" and "the wolf which was" and found both in many instances, so does this mean that I'm free to use whichever I choose, or is there some more specific rule to help me decide which is more appropriate?


----------



## RuK

Which is correct.


----------



## Jessila

Ok thanks 

So it's always "which" for animals, or are there exceptions?


----------



## afbyorb

_*which*_ is used for animals but
"The wolf _*who*_ came to dinner" is an example of _*personification*_ - a poetic or literary device.


----------



## JMgif

I would say who, because you still say "he/she" for animals. Animals aren't inanimate objects.


----------



## Maître Capello

_He/she/his/her/who_, etc. are only usual for *pets*. For wild animals, you should use _it/its/that/which…_


----------



## Donaldos

This is not necessarily true. You can definitely use _he_ or _she_ to refer to a wild animal, especially when the gender is known.

It really depends on the context.

[…]


----------



## Corky Ringspot

My feeling is that is that it should be *which*, although my impression is that usage varies according to a combination of the factors already referred to, but also to the speaker's emotional feelings about the animal in question and about animals in general. The more sentimental a person is about animals, the more he/she is likely to use *who*. Also, the more sophisticated or sentient the animal is, the more it is likely to be talked of using *who*; I love animals, but am not sentimental about them, and would generally use *which*, although in most cases I wouldn't use *which* in referring to an elephant or a great ape, for instance. I would advise a learner always to refer to animals using *which* other than in the case of such animals. The question is to decide at what point an animal is 'human enough' to be talked of using *who*; to me, a horse is almost always *which*, whereas an elephant is almost always *who*, although there are cases where I would switch; consider the following:
- the oldest elephant at the zoo, who is 65 years old...
- the male elephant, which in the wild may reach the age of 65,...

Both are possible in these examples, and I would suggest that usage will be commensurate with the subjective feelings about animals, specifically and generally, of the speaker.

[…]


----------



## EnFrDe

As Corky Ringspot said above, the "who/which" question is a nightmare to answer.  In this context (as in the original post) I would use "which", but who would work as well - it really is a matter of personal opinion about the animal at the end of the day.  The same debate could apply to the question of using "it" or "he/she" for animals.  I would call a cow "it" but a cat or dog "he" or "she" as appropriate.


----------



## kiss2580

I'm awfully sorry for bumping this thread, but I do need some clarification on something.

I had airbnb-guests here the other day and they brought their little pet dog, Mala. Now I want to leave a review saying that:

"X and Y were great guests. They brought their little dog, who/which was great with my cat".

My dilemma is that I know the dogs name and sex, so I want to say _who_, but somehow I feel like you can't go wrong with _which_ because it just a dog, not a person.

Which one should I use here? I'm not a native speaker, but to me, both of them sound good. Also, I don't want to use _that._ 
Thanks.


----------



## Maître Capello

As it is a pet, I'd definitely use _who_, not _which_, even more so because you're talking about somebody else's pet!


----------



## Enquiring Mind

The result of my Ngram here throws up two very important findings:
(1) Maître Capello is right. If we relate to the animal in the sense that it is a pet, and we perceive it as having a personality, then "who" is more common than "which", so "dog who" and "cat who" trumps (if you'll pardon the expression) "dog which" and "cat which", whereas non-pets like crocodiles and camels show a preference for "crocodile/camel which" over "crocodile/camel who".
(2) But with (non-pet) elephant, there is a preference for "elephant who" over "elephant which", and with (pet) hamster, there is a preference for "hamster which" over "hamster who", so my theory is bunkum.

In short, it doesn't really matter much. As you say, they both sound ok.


----------



## nizmo

I would go with 'who' when referring to an animal you've met personally!


----------



## Avignonaddict

However (don't shout at me) I would read :
'*they brought their dog which was great (=a great experience / treat) for our cat*' 
as meaning that it was great that they brought their dog, and not that the dog was great. So 'which', referring to an action (bringing the dog) and not an 'object / creature' (the dog himself).

If you see what I mean.
x

(I've just checked and you wanted specifically to say 'with' so maybe, in this case, my idea is not good. But perhaps one day it'll be useful to someone else.)


----------



## feruza erkulova

Crocodiles and lizzards are related to dinasaurs,...lived millions of years ago 
What can we use here WHO or WHICH


----------



## Corky Ringspot

Only 'which' is possible here. 'who' is usually for pets, and perhaps the great apes (chimpanzee/gorilla/orangutan) - but usually only when anthropomorphised by David Attenborough. One 'z' in 'lizard', by the way! And 'dinosaur', not 'dinasaur'!


----------



## NamanSinha

RuK said:


> Which is correct.


My English teacher just cut my marks for using "which" for a snake.


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Hi NamanSinha, and welcome to the forum! 
Can you give us the whole sentence you're talking about, so that we can get a clear understanding of the grammar? Then we will be able to comment usefully.


----------



## Corky Ringspot

As I suggested a LONG time ago (!), choose "which" for animals, nearly every time. Even in the case of highly intelligent animals, like apes and whales, "who" sounds a bit strange - unless the speaker has a particularly close relationship with the animal in question. "The snake who..." sounds daft to me. There's definitely a growing tendency in natural history documentaries for narrators to use "who", but it's a habit TO BE RESISTED! The next thing will be gender-neutral pronouns.


----------



## Maître Capello

NamanSinha said:


> My English teacher just cut my marks for using "which" for a snake.


What did your teacher recommend writing instead? "who" or "that"? Please clarify and provide the whole sentence and the full context. In the latter case, see EN: that / which.


----------



## Blah blah blah no no no

It should be which because which is about things and animals
Example:Which dog is maggie’s?
The dog which is black and white is maggie’s.
You won’t say like this:
Who dog is maggie’s ❌ it is incorrect.


----------



## Maître Capello

Hello Blah blah and welcome to the forums! 

Don't mix up things. Here you're talking about the *interrogative* pronoun, not the *relative* pronoun. In that case you use _which_ even for people! For example: _*Which* child is Maggie's son?_


----------



## Azby7

Corky Ringspot said:


> The next thing will be gender-neutral pronouns.


I'm tempted to reply it's already done! You can use "they". Furthermore, I don't think WordReference aims to take part in debates...


----------

