City Boys 10 plus results out by email

[Daogroupie]

Two SPAG mistakes in here, can you spot them? Record number of candidates again, it goes up every year. Such a great opportunity to bag a guaranteed 11 plus place.
Dear ****,
We are delighted to write to you today to invite XXXXX to the next stage of our admissions process.
We have based this decision on your child’s performance in the entrance examinations – so well done, XXXXXX for getting through to the next stage of selection!
We have had a record number of candidates applying this year and your child should be extremely proud of their efforts so far. We have sadly had to share bad news with many candidates and their families, and we ask that you be kind in your dealings with any disappointed children you may know who we have not invited back.
The next stage of selection involves an academic interview on Monday 31 January or Tuesday 1 February, which may take place virtually. You will receive an email next week inviting you to book XXXXXXXX interview.
In advance of the interview, can we also now please ask that you email a copy of the picture page of your child’s passport for our records.
If your wish to withdraw your child from the 10+ selection process, please do send us an email.
We look forward to seeing XXXXXXX again for interview, and we wish them every success.
With best wishes
The Admissions Team
City of London School

[Daogroupie]

It has now emerged that over 250 applicants sat the City boys 10 plus, another record number of candidates. DG

[hermanmunster]

Interesting - the "picture page" of the passport could be 4.5 years old (if they actually have a passport that is!)

[StatusAnxiety]

Well-spotted DAOgroupie.

It should read "any disappointed children you may know whom we have not invited back" ['whom' instead of 'who']

And there should be a question mark, not a full stop, after: "can we also now please ask that you email a copy of the picture page of your child’s passport for our records."

[crispleaves]

Disagree with your assessment. Grammar is not static, "whom" is not used extensively anymore, I consider it perfectly acceptable to use "who" instead. The request for a passport copy is not a question. I don't see the benefit of nit-picking over the email of a member of the admissions team. Presumably they are not also English language teachers.

[StatusAnxiety]

I agree that one should not nitpick the grammar of an administrator. I was just responding to DAOgroupie's question. And you are right that grammar evolves. But some rules serve a function and the difference between 'who' and 'whom' is not merely conventional. The accusative clause of 'who' serves the same function as that in he/him, she/her, they/them. It helps to disambiguate and improve clarity - for the same reason that we would not want to start saying 'give this to he', instead of give this to 'him'. It is not a pedantic obsession with grammar formalities of old English (as is, for instance, the rule against splitting infinitives).

As to the passport request, it would have been different if the email read "We would also like now to ask that you send a copy...". That sentence would express a request. But when one inverses the order of the verb and the subject ('can we...." instead of "we can"), then there should be a question mark at the end of the sentence. It is still a request, but the sentence is in question mode. One could argue that language has evolved and a polite request with inversion (question mode) does not require a question mark, because it is not really asking a question. Unlike the whom/who error, I have some sympathy with this interpretation, but on the other hand this is the type of grammar rule that top selective schools expect students to know in exams, even though it does not serve a specific grammar function.