When who or whom is not part of the relative clause, but still exists, it is easier to find out if it is objective or nominative, correct? You may find it easier. It depends on the amount of experience you have in working with these ideas.

Firstly, to clarify, will the 'who/whom' always be at the start of the dependent clause? >> I think so. Most examples I have seen, who/whom is either the object of a proposition (starting the dependent clause), or very close to the

"Whoever" is correct. The indirect object of the verb in the main clause is the entire noun clause, not just the head of the clause. Directly quoted from "Cliff's notes" (sorry for the long inset) Pronoun case in

Hello. Relative clauses can only be (from a syntactic point of view) either post-modifiers of nouns/pronouns, or sentence modifiers. They are never objects; they don't modify verbs. What can be subjects or objects, WITHIN the relative clauses

"I explained to her what your concerns are." explained = transitive verb to her (to whom? ) = prep phrase; her = object of the prep and indirect object of explained . what her concerns are = noun clause = direct object. Usually,

Nominative pronouns are used as subjects of the sentence or clauses. If you are unsure as to which word is the subject, restate the sentence by placing who or what in front of the verb. these words are examples of nominative pronouns in a

Hello again, MrP (IF I may I call you MrP). I think I understand now what you meant in the post I found confusing. You said: “...which implies that the subject of the <whosever/whose-ever> clause in the example is the same as the