• [email protected]@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Non native english speaker here, not trying to have an argument but to learn.
    Is it correct to use “whose” in this context?

    I kinda thought “whose” was meant to refer to a person and not an object, but really I don’t know.
    Though I’d use something like “of which” or whatever else instead.

    (Or just do what I do and rephrase it so you don’t need to bother with this syntax to begin with.)
    “What is a dish where each individual component you like, but when combined together become a dish you think is nasty?”

    • communism@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m not a native English speaker either but I’ve spoken English from a young age. “Whose” is used to denote belonging, not necessarily personhood, which can be confusing as “who” does denote personhood. There isn’t really a “whose” equivalent for objects so it’s used for any noun which another noun belongs to.

    • HatchetHaro@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      In this context, “whose” works fine, on the basis that almost no other options work at all outside of completely rewriting the question.

      I personally would just switch it out for “with” instead; it does slightly reframe the phrase but doesn’t change the question itself.

    • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      “Whose” should probably be “thats”. But a native English speaker will occasionally personify things and so the meaning would be the same, but you are correct.