Language desk
< February 13	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 15 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 14

What is the correct word? Which, who, or that?

I just ran across the following sentence in a Wikipedia article (Auction sniping): A bid sniper is a person, or software agent, which performs auction sniping. (emphasis added). Should the word in bold be "which" or should it be "who"? When referring to people. I assume we'd use the word "who". Right? But I am assuming that a "software agent" is some type of computer program, and not a human being per se. In which case, I can see using the word "which". But what would be proper in the given sentence, without actually rewording the sentence in its structure? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"person or thing which" Googles 10x more common than "person or thing who"; matching the nearer antecedent is a natural default. OTOH "person (or thing) who" prefers the main antecedent to the parenthetical antecedent; whether commas are sufficiently parenthetical I don't know. Ignoring your ban on rewording, "person or thing that" is twice as common as "person or thing which". jnestorius^(talk) 07:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"That" is certainly acceptable, as "performs auction sniping" is (arguably) a restrictive clause. See English relative clauses for the gory details. Tevildo (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The grammatically correct way to resolve the who or which dilemma is to use both. A bid sniper is a person who, or software agent which, performs auction sniping. Slightly pedantic and fussy - but fully in accordance with grammatical rules. 81.131.178.47 (talk) 14:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC) (posted by SemanticMantis (talk) 15:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Great solution. I would have never thought of that. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]