2

You can never stop people who are wiling to die

May I use "that" instead of "who"?

2

‘That’ in your case is a pronoun which can replace the pronoun who.
Generally it is used as the subject or object of a relative clause, especialy one defining or restricting the antecedent, sometimes replaceable by who, whom, or which: the horse that he bought, the man that came, etc.

0

I have read and confirmed it in many places - both are okay though some believe that who-goes-with-people rule is still better. Nevertheless, that is a relative pronoun there so it'll also work.

Well, my personal choice is who as that (though serving as a relative pronoun) does not look used for a human/living thing as compared to who

Further reading here

  • Your reference says: It is "entirely" acceptable to write either the man that wanted to talk to you, or the man who wanted to talk to you - See more at: quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/… – Lucian Sava Mar 5 '14 at 7:42
  • 1
    I already said both are okay in my very first sentence! I then talked about my personal opinion. And the link is for further reading. – Maulik V Mar 5 '14 at 7:53
  • I don't think this is as hotly divisive as the article implies. They are interchangeable and most English speakers will not notice. That said, you frequently see "who" as a relative pronoun in hyperbole than in everyday speech. – Metagrapher Mar 5 '14 at 8:09
  • This aligns with my view on the subject. In writing, I often find myself changing that to who in my second draft, simply because it sounds a little better. In speech, sometimes that will come out of my mouth, and it still passes as acceptable speech. – J.R. Mar 5 '14 at 9:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.