People That or People Who: Grammar Guide [English]

Grammar precision matters more than most realize. When referring to individuals, the choice between "people that" and "people who" carries weight beyond mere stylistic preference. This distinction reflects deeper principles of English grammar that impact clarity, professionalism, and reader comprehension.

The question emerges repeatedly across academic writing, professional communication, and everyday discourse. Understanding this grammatical principle transforms how writers approach human references, elevating both precision and readability in their work.

The Fundamental Rule: Who for People, That for Things

English grammar establishes a clear hierarchy for relative pronouns. "Who" serves as the standard relative pronoun for human subjects, while "that" typically applies to objects, animals, and concepts. This principle stems from centuries of linguistic evolution, where languages developed distinct markers for animate versus inanimate references.

The logic behind this distinction connects to cognitive processing. Human brains categorize information differently when processing references to people versus objects. Research in psycholinguistics demonstrates that readers process human-referencing pronouns faster when they follow expected patterns. This cognitive advantage translates into clearer communication.

Consider the difference in these constructions:

"The employees who completed the training performed better"
"The software that automated the process saved time"

The first example refers to human agents capable of action and decision-making. The second addresses an inanimate tool performing a function. This distinction matters because it signals to readers whether they should expect human agency or mechanical process.

Why "People Who" Dominates Formal Writing

Academic and professional writing standards consistently favor "people who" over "people that." Major style guides, including the Chicago Manual of Style, AP Stylebook, and MLA Handbook, recommend using "who" when referring to individuals or groups of people.

This preference extends beyond arbitrary convention. Formal writing demands precision because it serves audiences expecting clear, unambiguous communication. Legal documents, academic papers, and business reports cannot afford the confusion that arises from imprecise pronoun usage.

The distinction becomes particularly crucial in contexts where human agency matters. "People who make decisions" implies conscious choice and responsibility. "People that make decisions" subtly diminishes human agency, treating individuals more like automated systems than thinking beings.

Professional editors consistently flag "people that" constructions during the revision process. Publications ranging from The New York Times to Harvard Business Review maintain editorial standards that require "who" for human references. This consistency across prestigious publications reinforces the importance of this grammatical principle.

When "People That" Appears in Modern Usage

Despite formal preferences, "people that" appears frequently in contemporary English, particularly in informal speech and casual writing. This usage pattern reflects broader trends in language evolution, where conversational patterns influence written communication.

Certain contexts see higher rates of "people that" usage. Social media posts, text messages, and informal blog content often employ this construction without raising reader concerns. The informal nature of these mediums creates different expectations for grammatical precision.

However, frequency of usage does not establish correctness. Language change occurs gradually, and current informal usage may not represent future standard forms. The persistence of "people who" in formal contexts suggests that educated speakers continue to recognize the distinction's value.

Geographic variations also influence usage patterns. Some English dialects show higher tolerance for "people that" constructions, while others maintain stricter adherence to traditional rules. These regional differences highlight how local speech patterns shape written communication preferences.

The Cognitive Impact of Pronoun Choice

Neurolinguistic research reveals how pronoun choices affect reader processing. When readers encounter "people who," their brains activate neural pathways associated with human agency and social cognition. "People that" triggers different processing patterns, more similar to those used for object references.

This difference manifests in comprehension speed and retention rates. Readers process human-referencing sentences faster when they follow expected grammatical patterns. The cognitive load increases when pronoun usage conflicts with semantic expectations, potentially reducing overall comprehension.

Memory formation also responds to pronoun choice. Information about human actions shows better retention when introduced with "who" rather than "that." This advantage stems from how episodic memory systems categorize social versus non-social information during encoding processes.

The implications extend to persuasive writing. Messages about human behavior prove more compelling when they employ pronouns that emphasize human agency. "People who choose sustainable products" creates stronger emotional connections than "people that choose sustainable products."

Technical Grammar Analysis: Restrictive vs. Non-Restrictive Clauses

The "people who" versus "people that" question intersects with broader principles governing restrictive and non-restrictive clauses. Understanding these principles clarifies when each pronoun serves specific grammatical functions.

Restrictive clauses limit or define the noun they modify, providing essential information for sentence meaning. Non-restrictive clauses add supplementary information without changing core meaning. Traditional grammar permits "that" only in restrictive clauses, while "who" functions in both contexts.

"The people who attended the meeting voted unanimously" uses a restrictive clause specifying which people voted. "The committee members, who attended the meeting, voted unanimously" employs a non-restrictive clause providing additional information about all committee members.

This distinction matters because "that" cannot introduce non-restrictive clauses in standard English. Writers who consistently use "that" for human references limit their syntactic options, potentially creating awkward constructions when non-restrictive clauses become necessary.

The flexibility of "who" in both restrictive and non-restrictive contexts makes it the superior choice for human references. This grammatical versatility supports more sophisticated sentence structures and clearer communication patterns.

Professional Communication Standards

Business writing standards consistently emphasize precision in pronoun usage. Companies investing in employee communication training typically include modules on proper pronoun selection, recognizing how these details impact professional credibility.

HR departments frequently encounter pronoun-related issues in job descriptions, policy documents, and internal communications. "Employees who demonstrate leadership" conveys different implications than "employees that demonstrate leadership." The first version emphasizes human potential and agency, while the second treats employees more like resources or tools.

Client-facing communications show even higher sensitivity to pronoun choice. Marketing materials, proposals, and customer service responses that employ "people who" signal respect for human agency and dignity. This subtle difference can influence client perceptions and business relationships.

Legal writing maintains particularly strict standards for human references. Contracts, policies, and regulatory documents use "who" for individuals because legal interpretation depends on precise language. Ambiguous pronoun usage can create costly misunderstandings in legal contexts.

Educational Implications and Teaching Strategies

Grammar instruction faces ongoing challenges in addressing the "people who" versus "people that" distinction. Students often resist rules that seem arbitrary, particularly when informal usage contradicts formal standards.

Effective teaching strategies emphasize the logical basis for pronoun distinctions rather than presenting them as arbitrary rules. Students respond better when they understand how pronoun choice affects meaning and reader perception. Connecting grammar to cognitive processing makes abstract rules more concrete and memorable.

Writing assessment typically penalizes "people that" usage in formal contexts, creating stakes for students who master this distinction. Standardized tests, college admissions essays, and academic writing assignments all benefit from proper pronoun usage.

Teacher training programs increasingly emphasize these grammatical subtleties because they impact student success across academic disciplines. Science writing, social studies reports, and literature analysis all require precise human references.

Digital Communication and Evolving Standards

Online communication platforms create new contexts for pronoun usage decisions. Email, social media, and professional networking sites blur traditional boundaries between formal and informal communication.

Search engine optimization considerations sometimes influence pronoun choices in web content. Writers may select pronouns based on keyword research rather than grammatical principles, potentially compromising communication quality for algorithmic preferences.

However, authoritative websites in education, news, and professional services maintain traditional standards. These platforms recognize that credibility depends partly on demonstrating command of standard grammatical conventions.

Automated grammar checking tools generally flag "people that" constructions as style issues, reflecting programmed preferences for formal standards. These tools influence writing patterns by consistently suggesting "who" for human references.

Global English Variations and Standards

International English usage shows variation in pronoun preferences, with some regions displaying greater tolerance for "people that" constructions. However, global business communication increasingly standardizes around formal conventions that favor "who" for human references.

Academic English maintains consistent standards across geographic boundaries. Research publications, regardless of origin, follow international style guides that specify "who" for human subjects. This consistency facilitates clear communication across cultural and linguistic boundaries.

English as a Second Language instruction typically teaches the "who" for people rule as a fundamental principle. ESL textbooks and curricula recognize this distinction as essential for developing formal writing skills that transfer across academic and professional contexts.

Practical Application Guidelines

Writers seeking clarity should develop consistent habits around pronoun selection. Establishing "who" as the default choice for human references eliminates decision-making time while ensuring grammatical accuracy.

Revision processes should include systematic checks for pronoun usage, particularly in formal documents. Professional writers often maintain style sheets that specify pronoun preferences to ensure consistency across long documents or multiple projects.

Context awareness remains crucial because audience expectations vary across communication situations. While formal writing demands strict adherence to "people who" conventions, informal contexts may tolerate greater flexibility without compromising effectiveness.

The investment in proper pronoun usage pays dividends in professional credibility and communication clarity. Readers notice grammatical precision, even when they cannot articulate specific rules. Consistent attention to these details signals broader competence and attention to quality.

Understanding the "people who" versus "people that" distinction represents one component of effective communication strategy. Writers who master these subtleties position themselves as careful, precise communicators capable of handling complex professional and academic challenges.

The evidence overwhelmingly supports "people who" as the correct choice in formal English. This conclusion rests on grammatical principles, cognitive research, professional standards, and educational consensus. Writers who embrace this standard enhance their communication effectiveness while demonstrating linguistic competence that readers recognize and value.

Learn Any Language with Kylian AI

Private language lessons are expensive. Paying between 15 and 50 euros per lesson isn’t realistic for most people—especially when dozens of sessions are needed to see real progress.

Many learners give up on language learning due to these high costs, missing out on valuable professional and personal opportunities.

That’s why we created Kylian: to make language learning accessible to everyone and help people master a foreign language without breaking the bank.

To get started, just tell Kylian which language you want to learn and what your native language is

Tired of teachers who don’t understand your specific struggles as a French speaker? Kylian’s advantage lies in its ability to teach any language using your native tongue as the foundation.

Unlike generic apps that offer the same content to everyone, Kylian explains concepts in your native language (French) and switches to the target language when necessary—perfectly adapting to your level and needs.

This personalization removes the frustration and confusion that are so common in traditional language learning.

Choose a specific topic you want to learn

Frustrated by language lessons that never cover exactly what you need? Kylian can teach you any aspect of a language—from pronunciation to advanced grammar—by focusing on your specific goals.

Avoid vague requests like “How can I improve my accent?” and be precise: “How do I pronounce the R like a native English speaker?” or “How do I conjugate the verb ‘to be’ in the present tense?”

With Kylian, you’ll never again pay for irrelevant content or feel embarrassed asking “too basic” questions to a teacher. Your learning plan is entirely personalized.

Once you’ve chosen your topic, just hit the “Generate a Lesson” button, and within seconds, you’ll get a lesson designed exclusively for you.

Join the room to begin your lesson

The session feels like a one-on-one language class with a human tutor—but without the high price or time constraints.

In a 25-minute lesson, Kylian teaches exactly what you need to know about your chosen topic: the nuances that textbooks never explain, key cultural differences between French and your target language, grammar rules, and much more.

Ever felt frustrated trying to keep up with a native-speaking teacher, or embarrassed to ask for something to be repeated? With Kylian, that problem disappears. It switches intelligently between French and the target language depending on your level, helping you understand every concept at your own pace.

During the lesson, Kylian uses role-plays, real-life examples, and adapts to your learning style. Didn’t understand something? No problem—you can pause Kylian anytime to ask for clarification, without fear of being judged.

Ask all the questions you want, repeat sections if needed, and customize your learning experience in ways traditional teachers and generic apps simply can’t match.

With 24/7 access at a fraction of the cost of private lessons, Kylian removes all the barriers that have kept you from mastering the language you’ve always wanted to learn.

Take your free lesson with Kylian today.