‘Whom’ would be correct if we suspected it belonged to an individual, but ‘who’ is correct for a group, and we’re asking specifically about nations. Also, no-one would be confused by this, which makes your misguided, ill-mannered pedantry triply unnecessary.
A nation is a singular entity in this context, not a group of people. Moreover - a group is also singular in a grammatical sense. We are asking for one out of a set. Whom is very much the correct choice. It’s English’s sad attempt at a dative case. Although I recognise that it is acceptable to use who instead of whom, this is mostly because native speakers have been doing it wrong for so long the grammar has finally been changed to allow for it.
It still seems very much wrong to me - it hurts similarly as the popular “would of”
Whom*
‘Whom’ would be correct if we suspected it belonged to an individual, but ‘who’ is correct for a group, and we’re asking specifically about nations. Also, no-one would be confused by this, which makes your misguided, ill-mannered pedantry triply unnecessary.
A nation is a singular entity in this context, not a group of people. Moreover - a group is also singular in a grammatical sense. We are asking for one out of a set. Whom is very much the correct choice. It’s English’s sad attempt at a dative case. Although I recognise that it is acceptable to use who instead of whom, this is mostly because native speakers have been doing it wrong for so long the grammar has finally been changed to allow for it.
It still seems very much wrong to me - it hurts similarly as the popular “would of”
I definitely would of used whom over who.
Your pulling my leg!