And the society looks down on my situation. I've encountered people __, the worse your situation, the more they don't even see that you're human. Key: where
My teacher demonstrates the use of the combination "people where" using this sentence, which he found on a website. Since its direct speech, I'm wondering if the "where" is used so correctly, how about "who", which I also find weird, but it is too difficult for me to imagine how "where" can modify "people".
The use of 'where' is correct, and less formal than 'for whom'.
We can use 'where' as a conjunction meaning not only 'in the place that' but also 'in situations that'.
Use of 'where' as a conjunction may be considered poor English by purists but it is acceptable and idiomatic in spoken and written English. By 'purists' I mean people who would re-title the song 'The Street Where you Live' as 'The Street On Which You Live' or who would alter 'There are situations where you need a credit card' to 'There are situations in which you need a credit card'.
The clause with where is a subordinate clause and needs a main clause to complete its meaning. If the where clause comes before the main clause, we use a comma:
Where you find a lot of water, you will also find these beautiful insects.
Where you have to pay a deposit, be sure to get a receipt.
This is in addition to Michael's excellent answer. The OP asks:
It is too difficult for me to imagine how "where" can modify "people".
But that's not the best way to think about this. Instead, think of where pointing forwards to the following words. The word that points back to people is not where but the pronoun they: They don't even see that....
This is brought out more clearly if we rearrange the sentence so that it does modify people:
I've encountered people (on occasions) where, the worse your situation, the more they don't even see that you're human.
Compared with:
I've encountered people who don't even see that you're human because your situation is so bad.
