grammar question - use of I vs. me

[Gwenny]

When labeling a picture (usually on Facebook), "Mary and I at the opera". 

 

When signing up for an event, "Just Mary and I".

 

I think this is wrong, but I see it so often I now doubt myself.  Especially since it's from people with far more degrees than I have.  I'd use me for both of them, but then again I've only made it into R&S 6.

 

Is it that I've seen it wrong so many times that the right way sounds wrong?

 

 

[VaKim]

I agree that it is wrong. If you remove the other person's name, it would be pretty stupid sounding. "I at the opera." Ick!

 

Seems like people everywhere are doing this though. What aggravates me more are the ones who use "I" in the objective case. "John gave Mary and I a gift certificate." It is as if they are overcompensating because of being taught not to use "me" in the nominative, ("John and me are going to the dance.")

Edited February 6, 2016 by VaKim

[heartlikealion]

Tricky.

 

I'd put each of these statements as elliptical sentences, with the first being "Mary and I (are) at the opera," and "(This is) just Mary and I."

 

If you do that, then it becomes apparent that they are both, in fact, correct.

I would think that would still be incorrect. Wouldn't you cover up the first name and say "me at the opera" or "just me"?

 

But I am second guessing myself as well so... lol

Edited February 6, 2016 by heartlikealion

[VaKim]

Tricky.

 

I'd put each of these statements as elliptical sentences, with the first being "Mary and I (are) at the opera," and "(This is) just Mary and I."

 

If you do that, then it becomes apparent that they are both, in fact, correct.

Hmm. I don't think of it that way for some reason. I think of it more as "(This is a picture of) Mary and me at the opera." The second one is just awkward no matter how you look at it. Just my opinion, of course. 

[heartlikealion]

Sorry, I edited my post. But I'm still agreeing with you, VaKim. I just had to rethink what I was trying to say ha.

 

They should just use Facebook tags. "So and so" and "so and so" at the opera. Problem solved Lol. ;)

 

Oh and I don't think a degree means they are proper speakers.

[heartlikealion]

You would indeed use "I" along with a form of "be" in the first sentence.  Therefore, "I" is correct.

 

In the second sentence, because a form of "be" is the main verb, the nominative case must be used in the predicate.  Therefore, "I" would be used instead of "me".  It is correct to say "This is I".  "This is me" sound correct to your ear because we hear it so often, but it is, in fact, incorrect.

Ahh, this is one of those weird things like answering the phone! You say, "this is she" even though it might sound odd.

[Matryoshka]

Subject pronouns are used in the subject and object pronouns are used when they're an object.

 

The first one it's tricky because it's a sentence fragment - it's not really a subject or an object. I guess one could argue either way depending on how one imagines the full sentence to be.

 

In the second one, the pronoun is the object of the preposition 'just', so it should be 'me'; there's no argument.

[Matryoshka]

In the second sentence, because a form of "be" is the main verb, the nominative case must be used in the predicate. Therefore, "I" would be used instead of "me". It is correct to say "This is I". "This is me" sound correct to your ear because we hear it so often, but it is, in fact, incorrect.

????

 

Even if one imagines the full sentence to be 'This is just me', 'me' is *not* predicate nominative it is the object of the preposition 'just', just like in the sentence 'She is with me' uses 'me' - not 'She is with I'.

[Gwenny]

I was hoping for a unanimous decision one way or the other!  It seems part of the problem is that they are not complete sentences. 

 

How about if it were stated, "Here is a picture of Mary and I at last night's opera."  I'd use "me".

 

Also, "The other kids can't make it.  It will just be Mary and I."  Again, I'd use "me". This is the one that trips me up most.  I can imagine my mother saying "I" and she knew grammar well.

[Jenny in Florida]

Tricky.

 

I'd put each of these statements as elliptical sentences, with the first being "Mary and I (are) at the opera," and "(This is) just Mary and I."

 

If you do that, then it becomes apparent that they are both, in fact, correct.

 

Actually, the secone one would be incorrect.

 

"This is just Mary and me."

 

The pronoun here needs to be in the objective case, which is "me."

 

The first one is correct if you assume that was the intended sentence structure, because "I" is part of the compound subject. However, if, as was said in the original post, this is a label for a photo, the correct pronoun would be "me."

 

You can probably "hear" it if you remove the other person's name. Would you label a photo of yourself "I at the opera?"

Edited February 6, 2016 by Jenny in Florida

[VaKim]

"Just," in that case, is an adverb. It can be an adjective when the meaning is "fair." It is never a preposition, though.

[Kathryn]

When labeling a picture (usually on Facebook), "Mary and I at the opera".

 

When signing up for an event, "Just Mary and I".

 

I think this is wrong, but I see it so often I now doubt myself. Especially since it's from people with far more degrees than I have. I'd use me for both of them, but then again I've only made it into R&S 6.

 

Is it that I've seen it wrong so many times that the right way sounds wrong?

I imagine the full sentences to be:

Here is a picture of...

It will be...

 

and I'd therefore use me as an object pronoun in each.

 

Eta- I can picture the second being a subject:

...will be attending.

 

But I have a very hard time making the first one make sense.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Kathryn

[gardenmom5]

It can depend upon which field they obtained their degree.  My brother has quoted many a derogatory remark about english majors made by one of his engineering profs - while using improper grammar. . . . .

 

I confess - it was rather enjoyable to correct him (he tends to be rather arrogant). . . .

 

though in all fairness - I had an encounter with one of ds's high school english teachers - who accused HIM of plagerism because "teenagers don't talk like that". (she later apologized) . . . let's just say, her grammar and vocabulary were not what I would expect of an ENGLISH major . . . but explains why she thought a teenager wouldn't "talk like that" . .  becasue she, as an ENGLISH major - could NOT talk like that. :svengo:  she was in the wrong field.

 

eta: correcting spelling. . .

Edited February 6, 2016 by gardenmom5

[Kathryn]

"Here is a picture of Mary and me." -- this would be correct.

 

"It will be just Mary and me." -- this would be incorrect. It should be "It will be just Mary and I." Again, because it is not the objective case.

You're right. I was thinking direct object and not predicate nominative.

[Tanaqui]

This is probably an area where language is in shift, and I would not be surprised to find the entire construction reanalyzed within 100 years such that most educated speakers had no confusion and considered "...and I" to be correct in all places.

 

However, in prestige dialects today, it's generally considered that you should use the same pronoun you would use if you were only discussing one person.

 

"This is me" sound correct to your ear because we hear it so often, but it is, in fact, incorrect.

 

That's not how language works. What sounds correct to native speakers IS correct by definition.

 

[SKL]

"Me" is an object.  "I" is a subject.  When using "be" verbs, it's a subject even if it's in the predicate.  "It is I who wants another pet."

 

If it is awkward, use a complete sentence where "me" is correct.  "This is a photo of Jenny and me at the ball game."  "me" because it is the object of the preposition "of."  Or your caption could be, "Jenny and I enjoyed ourselves at the ball game."

[heartlikealion]

This is probably an area where language is in shift, and I would not be surprised to find the entire construction reanalyzed within 100 years such that most educated speakers had no confusion and considered "...and I" to be correct in all places.

 

However, in prestige dialects today, it's generally considered that you should use the same pronoun you would use if you were only discussing one person.

 

 

That's not how language works. What sounds correct to native speakers IS correct by definition.

 

Like a large percentage of native speakers? Because obviously there are lots of people that just speak incorrectly. "Where you at?" was a Boost mobile catch phrase. Drove me nuts.

[Paige]

Since neither of those are sentences, then I think either me or I could work because what you use depends on its place in the sentence. The phrases could be incorporated into different sentences. 

[maize]

Like a large percentage of native speakers? Because obviously there are lots of people that just speak incorrectly. "Where you at?" was a Boost mobile catch phrase. Drove me nuts.

Could be correct within a particular dialect while being wrong according to the dominant dialect.

[heartlikealion]

Could be correct within a particular dialect while being wrong according to the dominant dialect.

 

Eh. There are towns in my state that are French. They are butchered in speech, but we agree to say them that way because that's how the locals say them. I don't think it really makes it right, but just practiced. /shrug

[Janie Grace]

Hmm. I don't think of it that way for some reason. I think of it more as "(This is a picture of) Mary and me at the opera." The second one is just awkward no matter how you look at it. Just my opinion, of course. 

 

I agree with this. I think of it as "who is this?"... "it's me." 

 

It's a picture of me.

 

It's a picture of Mary and me. 

 

I also agree with whoever said it sounds like the (now common) overcompensation for being corrected for "me" in the nominative. It goes along with the overuse of "myself" -- as in "Steve gave the tickets to Mary and myself." Everyone is super confused about the first person! 

[regentrude]

It is completely correct. Who is at the opera? "I am". "I" is the subject.

 

"me" is often used, but grammatically incorrect. "me" is the object pronoun.

Simple check: if you would use "him" for a guy, it should be "me". If you would use "he", it should be "I".

Edited February 8, 2016 by regentrude

[Tanaqui]

Like a large percentage of native speakers? Because obviously there are lots of people that just speak incorrectly. "Where you at?" was a Boost mobile catch phrase. Drove me nuts.

 

No, there aren't. There are lots of people who speak dialects (or sociolects) different than yours. You are not the arbiter of correct English, and your dialect is not more or less correct than any other. (And from long experience, I can assert fairly confidently that you no doubt have usages in your speech that diverge sharply from Standard American English, probably ones that you don't even realize are nonstandard. And you almost certainly don't realize that many things that are perfectly normative and correct in Standard American English are seen as stigmatized and terribly incorrect in Standard British English, and vice versa.)

 

As Chaucer wrote:

 

Ye knowe eek, that in forme of speche is chaunge

Withinne a thousand yeer, and wordes tho

That hadden prys, now wonder nyce and straunge

Us thinketh hem; and yet they spake hem so,

And spedde as wel in love as men now do;

Eek for to winne love in sondry ages,

In sondry londes, sondry ben usages.

 

And if he said it, I sure believe it. Language changes. Better get used to it, because you're no Canute, you can't stop that tide.

 

Eh. There are towns in my state that are French. They are butchered in speech, but we agree to say them that way because that's how the locals say them. I don't think it really makes it right, but just practiced. /shrug

 

They're not French, not unless you live in France. Asking English speakers to adhere to non-English phonological rules is really a silly enterprise. I doubt that when you speak of traveling to Paris or Rome or Brussels or Tokyo or Delhi you pronounce those names according to the local rules - and those places are actually IN France and Italy and Belgium and Japan and India!

Edited February 8, 2016 by Tanaqui

[maize]

Eh. There are towns in my state that are French. They are butchered in speech, but we agree to say them that way because that's how the locals say them. I don't think it really makes it right, but just practiced. /shrug

That's just the thing: with language, common usage--practice--is precisely what makes something correct. The correct English pronunciation of the name of, say, Los Angeles, is the pronunciation used by those who live there; never mind that the name is Spanish in origin and the Spanish pronunciation is quite different.

 

Many, many words in English derive from Norman French. I doubt any of them are pronounced in the original manner. Would you argue that all these words are wrong? What about words derived from Old English? These too are butchered in pronunciation when compared to the originals.

 

Our modern pronunciations are entirely correct for their time and place simply because that is current usage. No rule need apply.

[regentrude]

 I doubt that when you speak of traveling to Paris or Rome or Brussels or Tokyo or Delhi you pronounce those names according to the local rules - and those places are actually IN France and Italy and Belgium and Japan and India!

 

Piggybacking a question that I have been pondering sometimes: people pronouncing names of cities that are located in other countries. People elsewhere fairly consistently pronounce American cities the American way (at least they try) - I have never heard anybody in Europe pronounce New York, Washington, Los Angeles the way those words would sound in their native language. OTOH, Americans consistently pronounce cities like Berlin or Paris the American way and not according to the language of those countries. Why is that?

Edited February 8, 2016 by regentrude

[maize]

Cross posted with Tanaqui, who usually addresses these issues much better than I.

[maize]

Piggybacking a question that I have been pondering sometimes: people pronouncing names of cities that are located in other countries. People elsewhere fairly consistently pronounce American cities like New York and Washington the American way (at least they try), but Americans consistently pronounce cities like Berlin or Paris the American way. Why is that?

I think some of these have much older traditional pronunciations in the various languages of Europe. The English pronunciation of Paris is no stranger than the French pronunciation of Londres. We follow traditional English pronunciations.

[Tanaqui]

My guess is that non-English speakers tend to have more exposure to English - particularly American English - than Americans do to other languages (most of the world is bilingual, after all). But I'd want to look at a decent sample size of my own before making any solid conjectures. Maybe the people you know are all just as unsufferable to their friends as that one dude who insists on (mangling) what they consider the "authentic" pronunciation of loanwords rather than using the usual English pronunciation is to, well, most Americans.

 

Many, many words in English derive from Norman French. I doubt any of them are pronounced in the original manner. Would you argue that all these words are wrong? What about words derived from Old English? These too are butchered in pronunciation when compared to the originals.

 

Herb. In America, said 'erb (which IS the original English pronunciation, and it used to be spelled that way as well). In England, said with the h pronounced. Nothing grates on me more than seeing the occasional Brit laughing about how Americans say the word. (Linguistically, I suppose we're both correct. Personally, you're only correct until you try to criticize my pronunciation, and then I WILL SMITE YOU WITH THE PASSION OF THE SUN.)

 

[regentrude]

My guess is that non-English speakers tend to have more exposure to English - particularly American English - than Americans do to other languages (most of the world is bilingual, after all). But I'd want to look at a decent sample size of my own before making any solid conjectures. Maybe the people you know are all just as unsufferable to their friends as that one dude who insists on (mangling) what they consider the "authentic" pronunciation of loanwords rather than using the usual English pronunciation is to, well, most Americans.

 

I am not referring to personal friends only - it is generally used on things like public radio and TV news casts. Even people who do not speak English would know these cities by their American names... so I was curious, especially since this predates the time when one can assume that most Germans have learned English.

And it is interesting that the same cannot be said about pronounciation of cities in other countries.

Edited February 8, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

I think some of these have much older traditional pronunciations in the various languages of Europe. The English pronunciation of Paris is no stranger than the French pronunciation of Londres. We follow traditional English pronunciations.

 

I do not understand this comment as an answer to my question.  Would you elaborate? What is "some of these" referring to?

I was talking about the way Paris is pronounced in France and Berlin is pronounced in German. Why are Americans pronouncing these words the American way, whereas Germans and French will  pronounce American cities the American way?

Edited February 8, 2016 by regentrude

[Tanaqui]

I am not referring to personal friends only - it is very noticeable on things like public radio and TV news casts.

 

Do public radio and TV news wherever tend to have a standard dialect that the broadcasters are expected to use?

[regentrude]

Do public radio and TV news wherever tend to have a standard dialect that the broadcasters are expected to use?

 

In Germany, the main stations use high German, which is considered the standard, but regional stations use the regional dialect. In no regional dialect have I ever heard American cities pronounced any differently - there is some locally colored accent, of course, so they can't make it come out quite the way an American native speaker would, but basically they strive to achieve that pronounciation.

Edited February 8, 2016 by regentrude

[Violet Crown]

When labeling a picture (usually on Facebook), "Mary and I at the opera".

 

When signing up for an event, "Just Mary and I".

 

I think this is wrong, but I see it so often I now doubt myself. Especially since it's from people with far more degrees than I have. I'd use me for both of them, but then again I've only made it into R&S 6.

 

Is it that I've seen it wrong so many times that the right way sounds wrong?

Unlike Latin, personal pronouns in English when disjoint from a sentence (as with labels, or single-word answers) are in the accusative.

 

<points at people in picture> "You. Me. Him."

 

"Who goes there?" "Uh, just me."

 

Also accusative (unless native speakers have it drilled out of them) when the object of a copula.

 

"It resembles me, because it is me."

[maize]

I do not understand this comment as an answer to my question. Would you elaborate? What is "some of these" referring to?

I was talking about the way Paris is pronounced in France and Berlin is pronounced in German. Why are Americans pronouncing these words the American way, whereas Germans and French will pronounce American cities the American way?

How is London pronounced in German? In French it called Londres, which is surely no more similar to the English pronunciation of London than the English pronunciation of Paris is to the French.

 

I am saying that major European cities have a long history in one another's languages--they essentially have a life of their own in each language. Neither Englush, French, nor German speakers give Venezia or Firenza their Italian pronunciations--in fact, each language has developed a name of its own for those cities with marked differences from the Italian. I would argue that these are words I their own right, differing as reasonably from one another as John and Johan and Jean.

 

Editing as the last list wasn't pulling up on my phone; there is a list here of German exonyms:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_exonyms

 

American city names, having a much shorter history, may not have gained native word status in many other languages.

 

ETA essentially I am saying that the English version of Berlin is as much a legitimate English word as is "Germany"; if one would argue that we must give Berlin its German pronunciation, surely we should likewise refer to the country itself as the natives do? But then, I've never heard "United States" given it's English nomenclature and pronunciation in German...

Edited February 8, 2016 by maize

[Tanaqui]

In Germany, the main stations use high German, which is considered the standard, but regional stations use the regional dialect. In no regional dialect have I ever heard American cities pronounced any differently - there is some locally colored accent, of course, so they can't make it come out quite the way an American native speaker would, but basically they strive to achieve that pronounciation.

 

Then I will fall back on "most likely, they have more exposure to English than most Americans have to German", with perhaps a side of "and also, German cities are generally older than American cities, meaning they have long-standing English names" and maybe "culturally, speakers of those languages with which you are familiar feel it is more appropriate to use the native pronunciation rather than their own".

[Tanaqui]

Unlike Latin, personal pronouns in English when disjoint from a sentence (as with labels, or single-word answers) are in the accusative.

 

<points at people in picture> "You. Me. Him."

 

"Who goes there?" "Uh, just me."

 

Also accusative (unless native speakers have it drilled out of them) when the object of a copula.

 

"It resembles me, because it is me."

 

And appeals to logic along the lines of "But the subject of a sentence is the nominative" are dead in the water, really. Language isn't very logical. We'd all like it to be, but it's not.

[Violet Crown]

And appeals to logic along the lines of "But the subject of a sentence is the nominative" are dead in the water, really. Language isn't very logical. We'd all like it to be, but it's not.

Well, I don't like to take sides in the endless prescriptivism/descriptivism wars; but it seems to me that when basically all native speakers use a particular syntax unless specifically trained not to do so, there's a certain quixotic quality to insisting that, nevertheless, the non-intuitive syntax is the correct one.

 

Regarding the city pronunciations: the British seem determined that we Texans are mispronouncing "Houston." /hyū/, cousins, not /hū/. :)

[Tanaqui]

Well, I don't like to take sides in the endless prescriptivism/descriptivism wars; but it seems to me that when basically all native speakers use a particular syntax unless specifically trained not to do so, there's a certain quixotic quality to insisting that, nevertheless, the non-intuitive syntax is the correct one.

 

Regarding the city pronunciations: the British seem determined that we Texans are mispronouncing "Houston." /hyū/, cousins, not /hū/. :)

 

1. Yes, I do agree with you on that front :) I'm pointing out that the prescriptive argument tends to boil down to "but logic!" and that just doesn't work.

 

2. But for the street in NYC, it's HOUSEtun. Named after somebody totally different.

[maize]

I had a professor Houston pronounced house-tun in college :)

 

Wonder how Sam Houston pronounced his name?

[Violet Crown]

1. Yes, I do agree with you on that front :) I'm pointing out that the prescriptive argument tends to boil down to "but logic!" and that just doesn't work.

 

2. But for the street in NYC, it's HOUSEtun. Named after somebody totally different.

Definitely agree. Language isn't math (or etiquette).

 

Of course, I don't mind the "alternative" pronunciation of Houston (or any other city, really). After all, I can't pronounce 'Edinburgh' correctly--the final consonant doesn't seem to exist in American English, and the existence of an 'Edinburg' ( /Ä“dinburg/ ), Texas, doesn't help. Different languages, and even dialects, just have different pronunciations of, and even names for, locations abroad.