Walking Into A Brick & Mortar High End Audio Store

Great article, Onhwy61. Thanks!

With respect to this excerpt in particular, though ...

In cases where a relative or interrogative human-class pronoun is associated with subject function in a subordinate clause that is not the main clause in which it is preposed, usage is divided ...

... I'm surprised that opinion would be divided :-)

Best regards,
-- Al

07-15-14: Czarivey
B&H is B&M all the way.

They also have a great website, and do huge amounts of business via the Internet. I've made a great many purchases over the years via their website, with 100% satisfaction in every way. So it's possible for a retail business to be successful as both a B&M outlet and a web-based seller simultaneously. And no doubt prompt and reliable order fulfillment and good customer service, as well as price, convenience, and the amazingly comprehensive range of products they carry, have all been major factors in their success.

Regards,
-- Al

07-15-14: Macrojack
We all know what the reference means because it is a common catchphrase and it targeted no one in particular and no group at all. It was just a phrasing that could easily have been overlooked but some of us had to make a big deal out of it. For god's sake, isn't it likely that all of the stereotypical crap that lingers in our minds as cliche is actually based in some truth somewhere?

The fact that a catchphrase may be common in some circles does not mean that its use should be condoned or tolerated. Would you feel comfortable using the aforesaid catchphrase in person, in the presence of an audience of diverse and unknown background?

The mention of Donald Sterling in one of the above posts, btw, brings to mind a different catchphrase, or more precisely, catchword, that was also "common" in certain parts of the country for a couple of hundred years or so. Does the fact that it was commonly used in some places make its use acceptable?

Regards,
-- Al

Discussing "who" vs. "whom," although often a question not lacking in difficulty, seems less likely to perturb domestic tranquility than discussing the other tangent this thread went off on. So I'll mention that I believe Courant is correct, and it should be "whom."

The spelling and grammar checker of Microsoft Word in Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2010 does not flag an error for either "who" or "whom." But using the "he vs. him" trick described at the end of this article, one would say (albeit a bit clumsily) "for him English is not his first language," not "for he English is not his first language," and therefore "whom" would be correct.

Best regards,
-- Al