Nope. Without a preposition immediately in front of it, it stays who. So you get "To whom are you talking?" and "Who are you talking to?". Besides, whom is pretty rare in spoken English.
I will absolutely grant that "whom" is becoming less common in casual speech, but I maintain that grammatically "whom" is correct. It is the object, not the subject, and the preposition you cite is still in the sentence. It's still "you" talking "to whom," no matter what order you arrange the words in.
While colloquial English often drops the "whom," if I am learning a language, I want to learn what's correct, not what will pass in many circumstances. :-)
What's more correct - an outdated form, or a current one? I've literally never heard the word 'whom' used in speaking contexts.
Historically, 'whom' is the correct form, describing the accusative (object-case) of 'who'. Like 'him' is the accusative of 'he'. But it's increasingly less used, and it's generally accepted that you use 'who' for whichever case, so do as you like.
Just don't say "whom are you?" or the Boogieman will come for you.
I use the word 'whom' every now and again, but not to frequently as it is a bit formal. And I like the poetic sound of it when it is used.
I agree with you. The Duolingo Swedish course accepts grammatically correct English and the Swedes' view of Denmark need not be repeated here.
Both "Whom are you talking to/with" an "To/With whom are you talking" are accepted
Shouldn't "who talked with you" be correct, and if not, why? It follows the context of the meaning from what I understand of Danish grammar.
In your sentence, the 'you' is the object ('who' did the talking), but in the sentence above it's the subject ('you' did the talking). The difference between nominative you (subject) and accusative you (object) isn't apparent in English, but it is in Danish: du as subject, dig as object.
"Who talked with you?" would be "Hvem snakkede med dig?"