[Grammar] He is the man whom/that Jane was referring to.

[wotcha]

1. He is the man whom Jane was referring to.

2, He is the mans that Jane was referring to.

3. He is the man Jane was referring to.



Sentence 1 is grammatical of course and I wonder about sentence 2 and 3.

Is it possible to omit objective relative pronoun in 2 and 3?

 

[atabitaraf]

1. He is the man whom Jane was referring to.

2, He is the man that Jane was referring to.

3. He is the man Jane was referring to.



Sentence 1 is grammatical of course and I wonder about sentence 2 and 3.

Is it possible to omit objective relative pronoun in 2 and 3?

Not a teacher here,
Yes, all of them are possible, plus: He is the man to whom Jane was referring.
You can do this only for 'whom'.

 

[Tdol]

+
He is the man who Jane was referring to.

 

[~Mav~]

1. He is the man whom Jane was referring to.
[...]
Sentence 1 is grammatical of course...

But is it really? :roll: I am almost certain that purists will insist on using "whom" only after prepositions. That is, it should be either "to whom..." or "who ... to", but NOT "whom ... to".

 

[atabitaraf]

But is it really? :roll: I am almost certain that purists will insist on using "whom" only after prepositions. That is, it should be either "to whom..." or "who ... to", but NOT "whom ... to".

Not a teacher here,

When it refers to a subject you can only use 'who' and when it refers to an object you can use either 'who' or 'whom.' Although the use of 'whom' is considered as an old and very formal way and it is not usually used in everyday speaking. You can use 'whom' in formal writing or speech but only with the objective use. (for more)