4 ms·

I've lately been surprised by how many native English speakers don't understand the rules I learned as a child regarding: "I" vs. "me", and "who" vs. "whom".

I've lately been surprised by how many native English speakers don't understand the rules I learned as a child regarding: "I" vs. "me", and "who" vs. "whom". EDIT: Also, "me" vs. "myself". Maybe working with compilers means I'm unusually comfortable with English grammar rules?

briHass 3y ago
I realized that I owe a debt to my mother for consistently correcting me as a child on I/me, they/them and other subtle rules. I don't have to think about the rule, the incorrect word just sounds 'wrong'. The downside is that I notice it easily in speeches or other talks given by otherwise intelligent individuals. If frequently repeated, it can be jarring, similar to an excess of 'um' or 'like'.
ithkuil 3y ago
I noticed there has been (relatively recently) a overcorrection of "John and me" to "John and I", independently of whether the "I" is nominative or accusative. - Who saw it? - John and I! (correct) - With whom did Mary go? - With John and I! (what? why?) If the speaker doesn't really understand deeply what is the reason why you'd use "I" or "me", then all the rules around that sound arbitrary and they will make an effort to "clean up" their speech in order to not be labeled ignorant, but they will make another mistake that only truly annoying nitpickers like me will complain about, and that won't make any difference :-)
- CoastalCoder 3y ago
  > - With whom did Mary go? - With John and I! (what? why?) Or, equally painfully, "With John and myself!" (What? The speaker was also the subject of the sentence?) THB I'm pulled between two incompatible positions: (1) Nobody has a right to define "proper" English language. The language's grammar is literally however a plurality of people use it. vs. (2) There is a "proper" English; it's what we were taught in elementary school in the 1970's. Failing to adhere to those grammar rules (e.g., when to use "myself" or "whom") is objectively incorrect. This article [0] seems to capture my thoughts nicely. [0] https://thewritepractice.com/cs-lewis-language/ https://thewritepractice.com/cs-lewis-language/
  - ithkuil 3y ago
    I don't find that use of "myself" painful, provided it's done in the right context / dialect (I heard that used at lot in Ireland)
Clamchop 3y ago
We learn these rules in school, although the degree to which students care varies. But, I was deprogrammed of my prejudice in University linguistics courses (highly recommend). What I learned is that speech is primary and it comes in many varieties (aka dialects) with different rules, and because textual communication has become the norm, we increasingly see these written. It's a mistake to assume that a construction is ungrammatical just because it doesn't follow the rules of prestige English. Of course other varieties have subtly different rules. Many don't ever use "whom", for example, and it would be eyebrow-raising if you did. You can think of it as register or code switching, if it helps. Similarly, orthography is just orthography, secondary to speech. It's a mistake to think that because someone wrote "should of," that they must not know the difference between "of" and "have". (In fact, that this orthographical error is virtually always made by a native speaker is some kind of signal.) Substandard for professional writing perhaps but that's all it is. Schools, with few exceptions, try to get everyone speaking and writing in prestige English. We generally don't appreciate variety and fail to see the parallels with, say, snuffing out foreign languages. I've since made the observation that it's curious that loving English almost always takes the form of being pedantic about prestige conventions and not instead enjoying the different flavors and their histories.
- ithkuil 3y ago
  I wonder at which point of the evolution of the English language the spelling will diverge enough from the pronunciation for it to make sense to just switch to an ideographic writing system

briHass 3y ago

I realized that I owe a debt to my mother for consistently correcting me as a child on I/me, they/them and other subtle rules. I don't have to think about the rule, the incorrect word just sounds 'wrong'. The downside is that I notice it easily in speeches or other talks given by otherwise intelligent individuals. If frequently repeated, it can be jarring, similar to an excess of 'um' or 'like'.

ithkuil 3y ago

I noticed there has been (relatively recently) a overcorrection of "John and me" to "John and I", independently of whether the "I" is nominative or accusative. - Who saw it? - John and I! (correct) - With whom did Mary go? - With John and I! (what? why?) If the speaker doesn't really understand deeply what is the reason why you'd use "I" or "me", then all the rules around that sound arbitrary and they will make an effort to "clean up" their speech in order to not be labeled ignorant, but they will make another mistake that only truly annoying nitpickers like me will complain about, and that won't make any difference :-)

CoastalCoder 3y ago
> - With whom did Mary go? - With John and I! (what? why?) Or, equally painfully, "With John and myself!" (What? The speaker was also the subject of the sentence?) THB I'm pulled between two incompatible positions: (1) Nobody has a right to define "proper" English language. The language's grammar is literally however a plurality of people use it. vs. (2) There is a "proper" English; it's what we were taught in elementary school in the 1970's. Failing to adhere to those grammar rules (e.g., when to use "myself" or "whom") is objectively incorrect. This article [0] seems to capture my thoughts nicely. [0] https://thewritepractice.com/cs-lewis-language/ https://thewritepractice.com/cs-lewis-language/
- ithkuil 3y ago
  I don't find that use of "myself" painful, provided it's done in the right context / dialect (I heard that used at lot in Ireland)

Clamchop 3y ago

We learn these rules in school, although the degree to which students care varies. But, I was deprogrammed of my prejudice in University linguistics courses (highly recommend). What I learned is that speech is primary and it comes in many varieties (aka dialects) with different rules, and because textual communication has become the norm, we increasingly see these written. It's a mistake to assume that a construction is ungrammatical just because it doesn't follow the rules of prestige English. Of course other varieties have subtly different rules. Many don't ever use "whom", for example, and it would be eyebrow-raising if you did. You can think of it as register or code switching, if it helps. Similarly, orthography is just orthography, secondary to speech. It's a mistake to think that because someone wrote "should of," that they must not know the difference between "of" and "have". (In fact, that this orthographical error is virtually always made by a native speaker is some kind of signal.) Substandard for professional writing perhaps but that's all it is. Schools, with few exceptions, try to get everyone speaking and writing in prestige English. We generally don't appreciate variety and fail to see the parallels with, say, snuffing out foreign languages. I've since made the observation that it's curious that loving English almost always takes the form of being pedantic about prestige conventions and not instead enjoying the different flavors and their histories.

ithkuil 3y ago
I wonder at which point of the evolution of the English language the spelling will diverge enough from the pronunciation for it to make sense to just switch to an ideographic writing system