10:56 Jul 7, 2011 

It looks as though, in November 1917, the best and brightest of the editorial department of the Geographical Review had been sent to the Front.

14:21 Jul 6, 2011 

“Meanwhile France, who had made her colonial beginnings in the Antilles and India in the seventeenth century, added nothing from 1700 to 1830.”
Mark Jefferson, “The Distribution of British Cities, and the Empire”, Geographical Review, 4, no. 5 (Nov. 1917)
http://www.jstor.org/pss/207833

Many similar examples could be quoted.

If the asker is interested in basic grammar, then of course we can say categorically that “who” is used for personal antecedents and “which” for impersonal ones. On the other hand, perhaps this asker has found the phrase quoted in a piece of writing and is curious to know whether it is just a grammatical error or whether there could be some other explanation. All I have been trying to do is address the latter possibility. I repeat: I am not recommending that anyone should imitate this usage. I do not like it, personally. But to say that it is absolutely wrong and leave it at that seems to me inadequate.

14:20 Jul 6, 2011 

I certainly do not want to put myself in the position of having to defend this passage by Graham, which, as I said, is poorly expressed. The personification trope, which you find "awful", is not to my taste either. However, I do not agree that "who" is absolutely wrong within that trope. Personification inevitably involves applying personal pronouns to impersonal referents; there is no logical reason, in principle, why this should be correct (albeit "awful") with subject or object pronouns (such as "she") but absolutely incorrect with relative pronouns. Graham's use of "who" is not an isolated case; it is actually quite characteristic of a certain rather outdated kind of historiographical style:
"Then Germany, who was an Austrian ally and an enemy of Russia, assured Austria that, if war began, Germany would back Austria. Meanwhile, France, who was upset with Germany because of the Franco-Prussian war, and who had invested pretty heavily in Russian industrial and mineral interests [...]"
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-1700...

(contd)

09:28 Jul 6, 2011 

Just because something has been written (even by an academic) doesn't make it right. The passage by James Graham that you quote is a lousy piece of writing and "who" is absolutely wrong. Even if one allows his awful use of personification, it should still have been "which".

Also, xxxRC's "rule ... that cars, ships and countries take a SHE" is not a rule at all and is best confined to ships (and only used sparingly even then).

02:27 Jul 5, 2011 

for your kind explanation. Actually my (Australian) prof. who stated that was at the edge of retirement twentyfour years ago

22:04 Jul 4, 2011 

"Who" is wrong, formally speaking. Yet it is not inconceivable that it could be used in a context in which a country such as Great Britain is being personified. Here is an example in a text by a historian called James Graham. It is not a great piece of writing (the punctuation, in particular, is unsatisfactory), but it shows that such things can happen:

"Bismarck once decided on a war with Austria set about trying to isolate her. Russia was already hostile with Austria, Britain was overjoyed at the thought of war between Austria and Prussia as was France who was also bribed with more hints of compensation at the secret Biarritz Conference."
http://www.historyorb.com/europe/bismarck2.shtml

The "who", referring to France, doesn't seem completely unnatural to me when I read this. Austria is a "she" (as Raffaela points out); Britain is "overjoyed". It is as if we were discussing a group of people. It must be stressed, however, that this is a very special case and shouldn't be taken as a model for general usage.

21:43 Jul 4, 2011 

I agree with lorenab23: I think your text will sound more natural (and will not alter the meaning) if you omit the "which" altogether.

Saludos from Mexico,
eski :))

21:40 Jul 4, 2011 

that cars, ships and countries take a SHE?

21:16 Jul 4, 2011 

avoid the pronoun all together (depending of what comes afterwords) and say: Great Britain, hungry for raw material, ... the "which was" sounds like an attempt to a literal translation from Spanish, in my humble opinion.