Editor for this issue: <>
"sharon l. shelly" <SHELLYMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueUKCC.uky.edu> writes: > I don't know why Randy Travis came up with "til death do WE part," > but I wouldn't be surprised if it were another case of > hypercorrection. I'm encountering more and more people, of > various ages, dialects and levels of education, who seem to believe > that the nominative case is somehow more legitimate -- or at least > more prestigious -- in ANY syntactic context. Thus: "They sent > it to Steve and I," etc. There are some cases that don't occur, > though: I've never heard "Give it to I," for example. > Apparently the internalized rule is something like: when in > doubt (because of a compound noun, or absence of any obvious > and local case marker), it's always safest to use the nominative. In H.L. Mencken's >The American Language< (citing from memory, so I don't have the page numbers or such) he explains the rules for pronoun case swapping in Nonstandard American English. 1) A subject adjacent to the verb is always nominative: "I went to the store." 2) An object adjacent to the verb or governing preposition is always accusative: "John shot me." 3) A subject separated from the verb is accusative: "Him and John went to the store." 4) An object separated from the verb or governing preposition is nominative: "He gave it to John and I." Mencken uses the term "conjoint" for forms adjacent to the verb, and "absolute" for forms not adjacent; for example, the answer to "Who's there?" is "Me", which is an absolute subject. *"Me is there" would be conjoint, and thus is ungrammatical. He also uses these terms to distinguish "my book", which is conjoint, from "this book is mine", which is absolute (separated from the noun). There is an exception to these rules. When the separating element is another pronoun, its case agrees with that of the separated pronoun: "Him and me went to the store.", also "Mary gave it to he and I." Now I'm not a native speaker of this dialect myself, but I certainly hear it around me all the time. Can any native speakers comment? -- cowan
snark.thyrsus.com ...!uunet!cbmvax!snark!cowan e'osai ko sarji la lojban
Since we're on a re-analysis roll, why shouldn't we read 'do part' as subjuncti ve causative and transitive, with 'us' as fronted object (I agree with Baron's hunch that the phrase was formerly 'us do part')?Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
The discussion of "till death do us part" --> "till death do we part" (or something to that effect), compounded by references to the common hypercorrection "between him and I" (etc), makes me wonder whether the English pronoun cases are eventually destined for oblivion. True, they do seem to have lots of stamina, considering all the other leveling that has taken place in English. But do we really need them? Consider Tom Lehrer's parody of Gilbert & Sullivan: "For I love she and she loves me And happy are the both of we. I love she and she loves I And shall for all eternitie." Quoting from memory there... :-) If the pronouns are eventually leveled, which will remain? The subject or object case? True for all, or a mixture? Will "me" disappear while "them" remains? I think the French would call this "linguistique d'anticipation." Don W. DonWebbMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueCSUS.EDU
I was moved by the recent discussion of variations on the theme of 'till death us depart' to go and check the wording in the Edward VI edition of the Book of Common Prayer (1549). I was surprised to find that it read "tyll death us departe". This sent my colleague Anthony Warner to the OED which states: Depart 3. trans. To put asunder, sunder, separate, part. Obs. 1548-9 (Mar.) Bk. Com. Prayer, Matrimony, Till death vs departe [altd. 1662 to 'do part']. The Middle English Dictionary (also courtesy of Anthony), under 'departen' has the following entry: (2(b)(a)): ?1403 Form OMatrim. (Lawson) p.xvi: For better for wers, in sekenes and in hele, til ded us depart. This is not my field, so I speak with some reticence, but it would appear that 'do part' is a misanalysis (of some antiquity) of transitive 'depart'. Steve Harlow University of YorkMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
The usage zgilbert refers to is of long standing in British English. I recall a line from _Midsummer Night's Dream_ in one of the scenes where the workmen are preparing to present the play, _Pyramus and Thisbe_, in which one of the less bright workmen says (approximate quote), "If you have the lion's part, pray give it me now, for I am slow of learning." He is told, "You may do it ex tempore, for it is nothing but roaring." or words to that effect. My American instinct would be to say, "Give me it now," if I had to do without pronouns. I should imagine that Quirk, et al would have some information on this, but my copy is not at hand.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
>From: zgilbertMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueepas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) >Subject: More Pronoun Usage Queries >consistantly used the expression "Give it me," when asking someone to >give them something. As a Canadian, I had never heard this without >the preposition (I'd say "Give it TO me.") >Does it occur in N.America? >--Zvi Gilbert Fascinating! I, too, would tend toward "give it to me"; occasionally I say "give me it" (or, more probably, "gimme it"), but that sounds a little awkward and is usually uttered without any reflection on speech forms whatsoever. For me, "give it me" is impossible, except to mean "give me to it"(?), and I have never heard such a thing from anyone else. My background: native speaker of English; lived most of my pre-college years in NW Indiana; since then mostly in Bloomington, Indiana; principal foreign languages are French, German, and Spanish; lived in France for six months; mother was native speaker of Portuguese; am twenty-one years old. Erik Carvalhal Miller ECMILLER
UCS.INDIANA.EDU Indiana University (Bloomington)
I always understood the expression "till death us do part" as a partial rationalization of the earlier "till death us depart", arising when _depart_ lost its transitive sense except in fixed expressions (_depart this life_). The curious OV order would be a direct consequence of the phonology of the original expression - a fairly unusual state of affairs. But I may have been misinformed! Richard CoatesMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In a msg from Sun, 15 Dec 1991 16:51:37 -0500 zgilbertMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueepas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) writes: >consistantly used the expression "Give it me," when asking someone to >give them something. As a Canadian, I had never heard this without >the preposition (I'd say "Give it TO me.") > > ... > >(What shall we call it? Dative pronoun usage?) The German translation for "Give it to me" is "Gib es mir" and 'mir' is a dative pronoun. Maybe the people who used this were fond of a Germanic style of speaking? :-) - Karl. Karl Dotzek dotzek
ds0lilog.BITNET
>From: "sharon l. shelly" <SHELLYMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueUKCC.uky.edu> > I'm encountering more and more people, of >various ages, dialects and levels of education, who seem to believe >that the nominative case is somehow more legitimate -- or at least >more prestigious -- in ANY syntactic context. Thus: "They sent >it to Steve and I," etc. There are some cases that don't occur, >though: I've never heard "Give it to I," for example. A joke phrase I have heard used, typically in a Pythonesque voice, is "'scuse I" instead of "excuse me". I don't know whether this is based on actual usage, or just an exaggeration of the nominative tendency for comic effect. I suspect the dialect variation of pronoun forms would show many 'nominative-position' pronouns are actually cognate with 'accusative-forms' in standard English dialects: "Us'll be leaving then". One 'odd' phrase is "thanking you!" instead of "thank you". I just wanted to get that off my chest. -- James M. Scobbie: Dept of Linguistics, Stanford University, CA 94305-2150