I know that 'who' refers to people and 'that' refers to things. But what about when the thing IS people, such as a family? Would I say, "That's the family that is moving in next door soon.", or "That's (they're?) the family who is (are?) moving in next door soon."?
-
3Anaphoric "that" can refer to anything.– BillJCommented Mar 15, 2018 at 19:13
-
Related: Which is correct: “staff that may have this information” or “staff who may have this information”?– herissonCommented Mar 15, 2018 at 19:59
-
Also related: Should you use “who” or “that” when talking about multiple people doing something? (ignore the accepted answer), What is the correct relative pronoun for “government”?– herissonCommented Mar 15, 2018 at 20:06
-
The fact (noted in the answer to the duplicate) that many people think 'that' refers to things, means that many people actually think it is wrong/rude to use 'that' in relation to people. Which will affect its common usage among English speakers. Which needs to be noted. Yes, the 'educated', the 'literate', section of the populace will know what is 'right', but that does not change the concept among the general populace. And concept is everything where language is concerned.– Nigel JCommented Mar 15, 2018 at 22:10
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
You can substitute "that" for "who" in relative clauses when the clause is identifying. If the clause is non-identifying, then "that" is not permissible.
