# Why does Oxygen act as Nucleophile over here?

We were taught in class that when a carbon atom and an oxygen atom both have a negative charge in a resonating structure, then carbon atom attacks the nucleophile rather than oxygen atom because it acts as a better nucleophile.

In the question I have attached, in the first step the hydroxide ion abstracts the hydrogen from the oxygen of o-cresol. The negative charge so formed is delocalised onto ortho and para position.

There are 4 possibilities:

1. Oxygen atom attacks $$\ce{CH3I}$$.
2. The carbon atom attached to $$\ce{CH3}$$ attacks.
3. The carbon atom adjacent to oxygen (not attached to $$\ce{CH3}$$) attacks.
4. Carbon at para position attacks.

Now, based on the statement that Carbon atom should attack, Option 1 should be ruled out. Option 2 also is unfavourable because the carbon atom attached to $$\ce{CH3}$$ would have less negative charge due to inductive destabilisation by $$\ce{CH3}$$. Option 3 is unfavourable because the product formed would be sterically crowded. Option 4 seems correct.

But the answer given to the above question is Option 2.

I confirmed from my teacher and he says that the statement that Carbon atom is a better nucleophile than oxygen is true but here attack from oxygen would take place (he doesn't explain why).

Also, in the well known Riemer Tiemann Reaction and Kolbe Reaction of Phenol, the attack takes place from Carbon side.

Question- where is my reasoning wrong? According to my reasoning, answer should be Option 1. Why isn't it?

• Phenols are fairly acidic, the -OH is completely deprotonated and the -ve charge stays on the oxygen - forget any potential resonance structures, they do not apply here. – Waylander Jan 19 at 19:21
• Fair explanation is given in: chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/38006/…. – Mathew Mahindaratne Jan 19 at 20:44