Whom was given the book?

Thank you, Casi!

It seems then that the 'dativity' of 'whom' can be reinforced by position (e.g. 'You gave whom the book?'), but isn't quite strong enough to carry off full inversion.

In the sentence 'Whom was given the book?', I find mild panic sets in at 'given': that's when you know something isn't as it should be.

MrP

Hello Casi

I would read them as follows:

1. To whom was the child given?
IO aux S pp

2. To whom was who given?
IO aux S pp

3. To whom was whom given?
IO aux S! pp

4. Whom was given (to) whom?
S! aux pp IO

where S! = hypercorrection (*).

The mild panic is fear-of-no-subject ('anonomastikophobia'?) bubbling over. By the time you reach 'given', you know the chances of finding one are pretty slim.

MrP

Hello People

I'm fascinated with your discussion. One might take "who was given the book?" as a wh-question obtained by changing the subject to 'who' in "he/she was given the book". But I still feel some oddness in the rule that we can say "who was given the book?" but we cannot say "who did you give the book?". The rule seems to lack some kind of balance between active and passive voices.

By the way, reading OED, I have found an interesting fact. That is, through the history of the English language, the dative interrogative 'whom' has been used almost always [except the one case of 1539's Bible] with combination of a preposition. Please take a look at the quote if you like.

whom the objective case of who: no longer current in natural colloquial speech.
1. In an independent question.
(a.) as indirect object (dative) or as object of a preposition (or after than) .
c1000 Ags. Gosp. John vi. 68 Drihten to hwam ga we? 1300 Cursor M. 8353 O mi kingrike quat redes þou? Quam sal i giue it for to ledd? 1400–50 Wars Alex. 463 To quam has þou þe tane till, tell me þe sothe. 1535 Coverdale Ezek. xxxi. 2 Whom art thou like in thy greatnesse? I Isa. xl. 18 To whom then will ye licken God? 1539 Bible. Isa. xxviii. 9 Whom then shal such one teach knowlege? 1591 Shakes. Two Gent. ii. i. 153 Speed. To be a Spokesman from Madam Siluia. To whom? 1603 Dekker & Chettle Grissil iv. i. Shaks. Soc.52 Seek'st thou a better nurse? A better nurse than whom? 1780 Warner in Jesse Selwyn & Contemp. IV. 369 For whom in the world do you think that I was kept so long kicking my heels? 1842 Ruskin Lett. to a College Friend 129 To whom should I write if not to the only one of my friends whom I cannot see? 1866 Le Fanu All in Dark viii, I played today..two rubbers of fives; with whom do you think?
(b.)as direct object (accusative).
971 Blickl. Hom. 45 Hwane manaþ God maran gafoles þonne þone biscop? c1000 Ags. Gosp. John xviii. 4 Hwæne sece ye? 1300 E.E. Psalter xxvi. 1 Wham sal I drede? 1320 Cast. Love 206 Whom mai he to helpe crauen? 1382 Wyclif Matt. xvi. 15 Whom seien ze me to be? Ibid. xxvii. 21 Whom of the two wolen ze to be left? 1450 Holland Howlat 69 Quhom sall I blame? 1513 Douglas Æneis i. vi. 38 Bot, O thou virgine, quham sall I call the? 1535 Coverdale Isa. vi. 8 Whom shall I sende, and who wilbe oure messaunger? 1539 Bible. Ps. lxxiii. 25 Whom haue I in heauen but the? 1704 Taverner Faithf. Bride iii. 27 Whom wou'dst thou injure with a Villains Name? 1855 Tennyson Maud i. vi. ii, Whom but Maud should I meet? 1870 Morris Earthly Par. III. 489 Whom think you she has seen?

paco

This is however ungrammatical: -> *who did you give the book

On whose authority do you call it ungrammatical? It sounds fine to me.

I know that most of the time the "to" occurs at the end, but not always. I Googled "who did you give" and checked the first thirty pages of hits. I found the following:

Who did you give: a raise, a mango, all the canoes, the most personal care of this kind, the money intended for the KLA, the nickname Shorty, that envelope, that?

There was no "to" at the end of any of them.

CJ