Why Grammar Matters: A Place To Discuss Matters Of Grammar

[Jel]

When "so" starts an answer to a question. That's the thing I am talking about I guess, and I notice it with my young nieces:

 

Auntie Awesome: What are your plans for the summer?

 

Lovely niece: So I am hoping to go to Disneyland.

 

That's new vs:

 

Auntie Awesome: So, what are your plans for the summer? (not new)

[shapeshifter]

... There might be a geographical component as well. My anecdote above (first time Sr. Helen heard a prayer begin with "So") was from the late 1990s and occurred in Sacramento.

I want to say that Chandler on Friends started it. A scene where, say, Ross and Rachel had a massive fight, so in an attempt to lighten the mood, Chandler says something like "So....cake mixes, a godsend or an evil to actual baking?"

I don't recall Chandler saying it a lot, but the first character that came to my mind was Cher from Clueless.  It's about the same time period, though, isn't it? I do it occasionally.

Yes, according to IMDb, Clueless is also from the mid 90s. So I'm thinking it is an artifact of an offshoot of Valley Girl Speak. Edited June 1, 2015 by shapeshifter

[StatisticalOutlier]

  It's not like disputing whether to believe in Santa Clause. 

 

Is that a dependent or an independent Santa Clause?

[ABay]

It's subjunctive, of course.

[Sandman87]

Grammar nerd joke! ABay wins the thread.

[Ohwell]

NBC news reporter, Craig Melvin, can sometimes come off as a know-it-all.  Well, this morning he was talking about LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavalier fans and how they've "done a 360" towards him now that the Cavs are in the NBA finals.  I'm pretty sure he meant they've done a 180.

[MyAimIsTrue]

Oh that makes me sad as I have a huge crush on Craig Melvin. He's gorgeous and usually awesome.

[amensisterfriend]

..."____ is  ----er ____ than me," particularly ironic when it's used like "I can't believe she thinks she's smarter and better educated than me!" 

Edited June 4, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[lavenderblue]

NBC news reporter, Craig Melvin, can sometimes come off as a know-it-all.  Well, this morning he was talking about LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavalier fans and how they've "done a 360" towards him now that the Cavs are in the NBA finals.  I'm pretty sure he meant they've done a 180.

 

Maybe it can allowed if one takes it to mean that they've returned to where they were back pre-Decision? 

[Ohwell]

Nah.  If you heard the context, it was clear that he meant they've gone from hating him to loving him.

[Sandman87]

The local newscast had a segment about people who get confused by the special speed limit signs which get posted near schools. According to the anchor: "Parents and people say these signs are confusing." Because parents aren't people?

From a PBS Newshour discussion of basketball: "If he takes the team to the playoffs, he will literally have done so carrying the franchise on his back." I wasn't aware that the Incredible Hulk played in the NBA.

[Qoass]

I feel bad for all those television commentators who feel badly about things.  Perhaps they're wearing mittens...

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I feel bad for all those television commentators who feel badly about things.  Perhaps they're wearing mittens...

 

Its funny that you mention that, because some female comic I was listening to said that she used to think her SO was calling her "Lee" as a nickname, because she would say something like, "Oh, I need that so bad," and then her SO would say 'ly' after waiting a beat.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Saw this on Facebook:

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/thriftymommaramblings/photos/a.598121220267266.1073741826.181183125294413/860964057316313/?type=1

 

And then I laughed.

[ToxicUnicorn]

Hahaha!  I would totally watch a half hour show that simply flashed one pun after another.  :)

[Moose135]

Hahaha!  I would totally watch a half hour show that simply flashed one pun after another.  :)

It would be better than much of the crap on the air these days...

[StatisticalOutlier]

The captions are getting into the act now, and not in a good way.

 

Today there was in interview on Book TV with the editor of the New York Times Book Review.  She said:

 

"The purpose of those meetings is the editor will tell my deputy and me about the book..."

 

The caption said "tell my deputy and I."  Whyyyyyyyyyy?

[shapeshifter]

This morning on National Public Radio, a donor was acknowledged as wanting to "provide music to all walks of life." To be fair, the announcer paused, and I'm pretty sure she was thinking what I was thinking. Also, the last time I heard one of these grammar mistakes on a contributor thank you, it was repeated later with a correction. There isn't much music on my NPR station, and there aren't people from very many walks of life listening, but at least they do correct their grammar mistakes.

[praeceptrix]

This might interest and amuse (I suffer from extreme technotardation, so I hope the link works -- it is to a PBS podcast of an interview with Mary Norris, author of Between You and Me Confessions of a Comma Queen): http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/new-yorkers-comma-queen-offers-guide-grammatically-insecure/#.VXeaYocc_BQ.facebook

[StatisticalOutlier]

This morning on National Public Radio, a donor was acknowledged as wanting to "provide music to all walks of life." To be fair, the announcer paused, and I'm pretty sure she was thinking what I was thinking. Also, the last time I heard one of these grammar mistakes ...

 

Okay, I'm just gonna have to ask:  What is the grammar mistake you're referring to?  I just don't see it, and it kind of scares me because my reaction time to "between he and I" is slowing; I assumed it's because of its prevalence, but being stumped on your example makes me wonder if I'm just losing it in general.

[shapeshifter]

Okay, I'm just gonna have to ask:  What is the grammar mistake you're referring to?  I just don't see it, and it kind of scares me because my reaction time to "between he and I" is slowing; I assumed it's because of its prevalence, but being stumped on your example makes me wonder if I'm just losing it in general.

Heh. Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't think "walks" were people, so it should have been "people from" or maybe "listeners from" [all walks of life].

[StatisticalOutlier]

Aah, I get it now.  Thanks.  Mr. Outlier was on that track (yes, I brought in consultants) but wasn't able to bring me all the way there.  I saw "walks of life" as something akin to "segments of society" or "socioeconomic groups," which I didn't think would need a "people" in it.  But "walks of life" is more like, say, "occupations," which would definitely benefit from a "people" in there.

 

But yeah, NPR isn't where I'd put my money if I were wanting to reach people of all walks of life.

 

As for Mary Norris, mentioned above, my comments are off topic for this forum but I'll just point out that the vaunted New Yorker has really started dropping the ball when it comes to perfection (like it doesn't seem to know the difference between silicon and silicone), which I fear reflects the employment of a generation of thumb-typers in fact-checking and editing positions--eh, close enough is good enough.  Hmm...I suspect they're working in writer's (writers'?) rooms of TV shows, too, which might explain a lot.

[shapeshifter]

First post-lunch-break email subject line this Friday in my academic institution:

"Mail Services outing."

No, Mail Services had not been engaged in any secretive activities that were now being revealed.

No, they were not having a picnic.

"Outing" was in reference to Mail Services closing early, that is, they were going "out" of the office early.

Maybe they did have a picnic?

Edited June 13, 2015 by shapeshifter

[Sandman87]

From an ad for a local clinic: "We have a tradition of patient-centered health care." As opposed to the kind that's centered on license plate frames and chocolate Easter eggs.

From an ad for a local security company: "Protecting your home is a priority for every home owner." Every home owner wants to protect my home? I feel so important!

[StatisticalOutlier]

On the Daily Show last night, Jon Stewart pulled up a picture and said, "This is Judd and I on the set of..."

 

I've never been good with the "It is I" vs. "it is me." (I'm a freestyle grammarian and couldn't diagram a sentence to save my life.)  Is what Stewart said correct and I've become hypersensitive, or is it the same old "between Judd and I" irritant?

 

I used to say "uuuggghhhh" at the TV when I heard "between Judd and I," but have changed to saying "yay!" when someone uses "me" in there.  It's a lot less work.

[shapeshifter]

On the Daily Show last night, Jon Stewart pulled up a picture and said, "This is Judd and I on the set of..."

 

I've never been good with the "It is I" vs. "it is me." (I'm a freestyle grammarian and couldn't diagram a sentence to save my life.)  Is what Stewart said correct and I've become hypersensitive, or is it the same old "between Judd and I" irritant?

 

I used to say "uuuggghhhh" at the TV when I heard "between Judd and I," but have changed to saying "yay!" when someone uses "me" in there.  It's a lot less work.

You and I may be hypersensitive, StatisticalOutlier, but not because we are puzzled by this turn of phrase. From Grammar Girl:

In her aptly titled book Woe Is I, Patricia O'Connor notes that almost everyone says, “It is me,” and that the “It is I” construction is almost extinct...

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Um.

 

 

https://scontent-lax1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/11043124_10153134227837287_3844529643640176905_n.jpg?oh=6f383f149b9dce349c8c6a7b62f412f2&oe=562D39D8

 

And also LMAO.

 

Sorry if this isn't really the right thread for this, but I had to put it somewhere.

[legaleagle53]

On the Daily Show last night, Jon Stewart pulled up a picture and said, "This is Judd and I on the set of..."

 

I've never been good with the "It is I" vs. "it is me." (I'm a freestyle grammarian and couldn't diagram a sentence to save my life.)  Is what Stewart said correct and I've become hypersensitive, or is it the same old "between Judd and I" irritant?

 

The rule is that the linking verb "be" requires the Nominative (subject) case on both sides of the equation.  That's why it's "It is he," not "it is him."  If you invert the two pronouns, the reason becomes clear:  "Him is it" doesn't work.  Similarly, "this is Judd and I on the set of..." because "Judd and me are whom you see on the set of..." (which would be the functional equivalent of inverting both sides of the equation linked by a form of "be") simply doesn't work.  Pronouns in the objective case can never be the subject of a sentence, especially a sentence using a linking verb.

 

Where the confusion comes in is when people try to apply the above rule at the wrong time, and it's because they don't understand the reason for that rule. Because we've been told over and over that "Judd and me" can never be the SUBJECT of a sentence, we've come to assume that the use of objective-case pronouns is NEVER correct, which is simply not true.  Objective-case pronouns DO have a function in English -- as the OBJECTS of transitive verbs (that is, verbs that can take a direct or indirect object) or prepositions (which can ONLY take objects).  Thus, "between you and me," NEVER "between you and I."  Likewise, "you see Judd and me,"  NEVER "you see Judd and I."

 

Now, compound genitives (possessives) are a different matter... .

[StatisticalOutlier]

Thank you.  Your guyses explanations were very helpful.  My apologies to Jon Stewart.  I  never should have doubted him.  But I swear, every time I hear the word "I" near another name or a pronoun these days, I flinch.

 

But I suppose we're just going to have to throw in the towel on this "between her and I" business?  Because to my ears it has actually become more common than the correct "her and me."  What is the tipping point for acceptance?

 

And speaking of "actually," I have to turn off the teevee sometimes on account of an avalanche of actually (I assume the plural is the same as the singular, like deer).  Real estate agents on house hunting shows are the worst.  This is actually a three bedroom, two bath house.  The price is actually $259,000.  There is actually a metro stop one block away. 

 

But the grand prize winner?  I can't remember the show, but one time someone said, "My mother actually died last year." 

[legaleagle53]

Thank you.  Your guyses explanations were very helpful.  My apologies to Jon Stewart.  I  never should have doubted him.  But I swear, every time I hear the word "I" near another name or a pronoun these days, I flinch.

 

But I suppose we're just going to have to throw in the towel on this "between her and I" business?  Because to my ears it has actually become more common than the correct "her and me."  What is the tipping point for acceptance?

 

Never.  Not while there is an ounce of breath left in my body.  They can only get me to accept it once they have pried my grammar book out of my cold, dead fingers.

[Sandman87]

Note to news people and advertisers: Saying that something costs"three times less" is not the same as saying that it costs "one-third as much." If I buy something that costs three times less, I will spend a negative number and make money from the transaction.

[bmasters9]

From an ad for a local security company: "Protecting your home is a priority for every home owner." Every home owner wants to protect my home? I feel so important!

I think personally that if they had said "Protecting one's home..." in that ad, it might have sounded better. 

[legaleagle53]

I think personally that if they had said "Protecting one's home..." in that ad, it might have sounded better. 

 

I think that was the point of Sandman87's snarky post.

 

Personally, I simply would have recast the whole sentence:  "Every homeowner's priority is protecting his or her home."

[mansonlamps]

The rule is that the linking verb "be" requires the Nominative (subject) case on both sides of the equation.  That's why it's "It is he," not "it is him."  If you invert the two pronouns, the reason becomes clear:  "Him is it" doesn't work.  Similarly, "this is Judd and I on the set of..." because "Judd and me are whom you see on the set of..." (which would be the functional equivalent of inverting both sides of the equation linked by a form of "be") simply doesn't work.  Pronouns in the objective case can never be the subject of a sentence, especially a sentence using a linking verb.

Ok so have I been doing this wrong all my life? I usually change the sentence to a singular format to determine usage, in this case removing "Judd and" from the equation. So in the case of Jon Stewart, I would have used "This is me on the set of...." to determine that "This is (Judd and) me on the set of...." to be correct. What if Judd wasn't around? Would it be proper to say "This is I on the set of..."

My head hurts.

I think that was the point of Sandman87's snarky post.

 

Personally, I simply would have recast the whole sentence:  "Every homeowner's priority is protecting his or her home."

I don't know I kind of like the idea of everybody being so concerned about my home instead of their own :)

[legaleagle53]

Ok so have I been doing this wrong all my life? I usually change the sentence to a singular format to determine usage, in this case removing "Judd and" from the equation. So in the case of Jon Stewart, I would have used "This is me on the set of...." to determine that "This is (Judd and) me on the set of...." to be correct. What if Judd wasn't around? Would it be proper to say "This is I on the set of..."

My head hurts.

 

Technically, it would be correct to say "this is I," but it would be awkward to say.  The better way to say it is simply "Here am I on the set of..."

 

(The aspirin is on me.)

[bmasters9]

I think that was the point of Sandman87's snarky post.

 

Personally, I simply would have recast the whole sentence:  "Every homeowner's priority is protecting his or her home."

Much improved over mine! That sounds like the best way of putting it. 

[mansonlamps]

Technically, it would be correct to say "this is I," but it would be awkward to say. The better way to say it is simply "Here am I on the set of..."

(The aspirin is on me.)

I feel kind of bad, I've been teaching this grammar "trick" to co-workers for years. Hopefully it works most of the time.

[bilgistic]

THANK YOU!! I KNEW she did that! My sisters and I discussed it at length back then, but no one would back us up. Keanu Reeves did the same thing. In the "Bill and Ted" days, he was "Kee-noo", then when "The Matrix" happened, he was suddenly "Kee-ahh-noo".

[Qoass]

Huh.  I always thought Demi was short for Demitria and therefore the emphasis on the second syllable would be appropriate.  I don't think the people I listed changed how they pronounced their names.  I think they've just gotten tired of correcting people who did.

[shapeshifter]

I was reading this NY Times article about the prison escape to my daughter while she was stuck in traffic on her way home from work at a jail, when this sentence gave me pause:

...There have been reports that Ms. Mitchell had been romantically involved with one or both of the inmates, but the nature of their relationship remain murky.

Even if there are multiple relationships, there is only one "nature" here.

But when I read further, my daughter flipped out because, she says, "corrections officers" have no jurisdiction outside of the prison, so it must have been "police officers" here:

Around the Clinton prison and beyond, the roadblocks staffed by heavily armed state troopers and corrections officers since the escape were gone on Wednesday, and there were noticeably fewer officers patrolling the streets.

There's a video with the article (which likely was aired on TV locally in NY), which does not include either of these mistakes found in the NY frickin' Times. I guess we can say "the times, they are a-changin.'"

[legaleagle53]

I was reading this NY Times article about the prison escape to my daughter while she was stuck in traffic on her way home from work at a jail, when this sentence gave me pause: Even if there are multiple relationships, there is only one "nature" here.

Around the Clinton prison and beyond, the roadblocks staffed by heavily armed state troopers and corrections officers since the escape were gone on Wednesday, and there were noticeably fewer officers patrolling the streets.

 

At least the writer of the article remembered that it's "fewer officers" and not "less officers."  That error would send ME over the edge.

[bmasters9]

 

This opening of a 1986 rerun of the 1980-82 game show Bullseye with the late Jim Lange (that show was rerun on the USA Network, which no longer reruns game shows) had Jim opening by having announcer Jay Stewart "introduce our first two players," only to have Jay say "our champion." The mistake in there is in Jim saying "our first two players," which would normally only be used on the first episode of a new show, not on future shows within the run (outside of TPIR, which always says "the first four contestants"). 

Edited June 20, 2015 by bmasters9

[AuntiePam]

Not grammar, but weather announcers who repeat the same words and phrases in a short report.  Are they required to fill every second with talk, no pauses?  Sample: "This evening temperatures will be in the 70's tonight with light winds as well."  There's a new guy on the local CBS affiliate who needs to listen to himself.  It's all babble. 

 

And "Temperatures have went down" -- "river levels have went up".  If they're not reading from their iPads, their grammar is atrocious.

[StatisticalOutlier]

I give haircasters a little bit of a pass because they really do need to fill just about every second with talk.  I'm a lfietime .500 talker, and even I think it would be hard to fill air time the way they have to.  And in the case of weather, there are probably only so many words to be used, even if you count all the synonyms.

 

However, I give NO pass to basic bad grammar, and I wonder how long it will be before "have went" won't feel like a board upside my head.  And how long it will be before it's considered acceptable because it's common and you know what they meant so what's the big deal?

[Sandman87]

One of the new news guys at the local station managed to say all of the following within a single five minute segment:

- "...and with all the dry brush that chance of dry lightning could increase our danger risk."

- "Coming up, more on that illegal forest fire in Alaska." I still can't figure out what he meant by that.

- "...and with that reduced winds may start the...uh, less activity." A twofer!

Meanwhile, the national ABC news gave us this regarding the prison-break manhunt: "This man was awokened in the early morning hours by gunshots."

[praeceptrix]

I think they forgot to add an important comma: http://screamer.deadspin.com/banner-urges-englands-world-cup-fans-to-come-on-their-g-1713712446

[Joe]

Good one! Related, I saw a sign at the supermarket. a pile of meaty bones and the words customers make great winter soup. Now, I like ham, but I'm not so fond of long pork. :)

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Maybe its Hannibal Lecter's grocery store.

[shapeshifter]

I was pleasantly surprised to hear a newscaster correctly pronounce "redistricting" yesterday instead of the usual, incorrect "redisticting" (with no "r"). Am I the only one who hears this every time there's buzz about this topic?

[Rick Kitchen]

There's an ad for a local vocational college that runs all the time where the announcer keeps pronouncing "respiratory therapist" as "respitory".  It makes me crazy every time she says it.