Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching
Learnglish.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

'There is nothing between your brother and I'

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
jinhyun - 16 Jan 2007 12:04 GMT
Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
It seems that both 'brother' and 'me' are in the accusative case here.
After all,we would only recast the sentence as 'There is nothing
between us' and not 'There is nothing between we'. But maybe I'm
missing something, perhaps to do with idiom or even grammar. Also, if
as I suspect,'brother' is in the accusative case here, I'd like to know
just how we arrive at that conclusion, since here, brother is not the
object of a verb but rather the substantive(i.e noun or pronoun) linked
to 'there is nothing' by 'between'. It seems to me that the substantive
linked to another part of the sentence by a preposition is always in
the accusative case, though I am unable to find this statement in
grammar books, and indeed don't even know where to look - having lost
touch with that subject. In your replies, I'd appreciate if you didn't
get too technical except when absolutely necessary. Thanks in advance.
Don Phillipson - 16 Jan 2007 13:23 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
> It seems that both 'brother' and 'me' are in the accusative case here.

You are right.  This error is common and has two sources:
1.  Dialect use:  some parts of rural England (and perhaps
also parts of the USA) had in the 19th century distinct
dialects that used I and ME in (consistently) non-standard ways.
2.  Simple ignorance, i.e. error not understood by the speaker.
School methods of teaching English in the USA and UK
have since 1960 given formal grammar much less attention
than formerly.  Significant numbers of Britons and Americans
now do not know how to parse a sentece.
Signature

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Donna Richoux - 16 Jan 2007 13:57 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> touch with that subject. In your replies, I'd appreciate if you didn't
> get too technical except when absolutely necessary. Thanks in advance.

This is a change that has been growing rapidly in the last five or ten
years. People don't speak according to complex grammatical categories,
they speak the way they think they are supposed to, and an increasing
number of people appear to think that when there are compound phrases
like "my husband and me" or "Charlie and me" then it should instead be
constructed with "and I". When I was a girl (forty years ago) it was a
sign of hypercorrection, of people going overboard trying to avoid
mistakes, but you can hear it anywhere now. I think it's moved beyond
people trying to struggle with grammatical rules, it has moved into the
simpler category of people imitating what they hear.

Signature

Best wishes -- Donna Richoux

CDB - 16 Jan 2007 14:36 GMT
>> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your
>> brother and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> [main question answered]

The pronoun is in the accusative case, and the noun may be said to be
so, because they are objects of a preposition.  Googling on
"object"and "preposition" together will get you more hits on the
subject than you can shake a stick at (preposition).
Arcadian Rises - 16 Jan 2007 14:46 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> touch with that subject. In your replies, I'd appreciate if you didn't
> get too technical except when absolutely necessary. Thanks in advance.

"Woe is I"!
Don Phillipson - 16 Jan 2007 19:20 GMT
"Woe is I"!

Cave . . .   "Woe is me" may be a summary
translation of Latin "Vae mihi" i.e. woe is to me.
The Romans also said "Vae victis" (which unambiguously
exhibits the dative case), but ever "vae ego."

Signature

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

jinhyun - 16 Jan 2007 15:02 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> touch with that subject. In your replies, I'd appreciate if you didn't
> get too technical except when absolutely necessary. Thanks in advance.

Hi. I just realized the possibility that 'your brother' is actually in
the dative case being connected to the main clause by a preposition.
But I'm out of my depth here. I haven't studied English grammar a long
time (I just looked up the dative case).I am tempted to stop hunting
for grammar rules and just - as Donna sagely says - imitate what I
hear,taking care,of course,to hear the right people, in this case,
presumably, native speakers who regularly read and write academic
prose. But it would still be nice to know the rules even if you are
going to flout them anyway.
cybercypher - 16 Jan 2007 14:33 GMT
>> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your
>> brother and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> English grammar a long time (I just looked up the dative case).I
> am tempted to stop hunting for grammar rules

A wise idea.

> and just - as Donna
> sagely says - imitate what I hear,taking care,of course,to hear
> the right people, in this case, presumably, native speakers who
> regularly read and write academic prose.

Academic prose is ... well, just too damned academic. Makes one sound
like a book, and usually a bad book if not an old and mouldy one.
Listen to people who speak good English and who speak it well.
Imitate them. Read people who write good English prose and who write
it well. Concentrate on style, not grammar. That will raise the level
of your English much more than being grammatically perfect.

> But it would still be
> nice to know the rules even if you are going to flout them anyway.

Nah, nobody cares about flouting the rules. You have to know them
only if you're going to flaunt them.

Signature

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan.
"If you are still not convinced of the a.s-brain connection, finish
this sentence: 'It is easier to think after I … (a) get a haircut    
(b) take a dump'." Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog, 12 Jan 2007;  
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/
teranews now charges a one-time US$3.95 setup fee

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

M James Hunt - 16 Jan 2007 15:30 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> touch with that subject. In your replies, I'd appreciate if you didn't
> get too technical except when absolutely necessary. Thanks in advance.

Clearly it should be "me" in this case if the rules for use of pronouns
are remotely consistent.  I think the problem goes back to incomplete
teaching at an early age.  I remember being told several times at
school that "Bobby and me went to the park" is incorrect, and it should
be "Bobby and I went to the park", but they rarely expanded on that, so
we have a generation growing up learning that "[person] and I" is
correct usage and "[person] and me" is incorrect.

One teacher did explain that one would not say "Me went to the park".
Likewise, one would not say "There is nothing between I" or to use a
more suitable preposition "There is nothing beside I"
Snis Pilbor - 16 Jan 2007 18:14 GMT
> > Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> > and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> Likewise, one would not say "There is nothing between I" or to use a
> more suitable preposition "There is nothing beside I"

There also seems to be a problem of ignorant teachers passing on their
ignorance.  *Anecdote Alert*  Every teacher has one pet peeve/nitpick
to which they pay special attention.  When I was in 6th grade, the
nitpick of my 6th grade teacher was "and me".  Anytime anyone said "and
me" in any context or sentence, she would correct them with "and I",
even if "and me" was the correct grammar.  As a result, I long suffered
a habit of saying "and I" in inappropriate places.  Of course, she was
not intentionally misleading, she was doing the best she could with the
knowledge she had; indeed a true linguist would not fault her at all,
but merely raise an eyebrow and smile at the very interesting way
English is changing.
John Kane - 16 Jan 2007 18:54 GMT
--- clip---
>I remember being told several times at
> school that "Bobby and me went to the park" is incorrect, and it should
> be "Bobby and I went to the park", b

Yes indeed, "Bobby and me" is incorrect.  The correct sentence is "Me
and Bobby went to the park".

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
Martin Ambuhl - 16 Jan 2007 16:10 GMT
> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?

Yes. Look up "hypercorrection."
Matthew Huntbach - 17 Jan 2007 09:52 GMT
>> Hi. Recently I heard the line 'There is nothing between your brother
>> and I' on a television programme. Shouldn't this be 'brother and me'?

> Yes. Look up "hypercorrection."

In more detail, the form "X and I" should be used when it is the subject
of a phrase according to "correct English grammar". However, people very
commonly use "X and me" here. Since few people have any trouble using "I"
for subject and "me" for object in other circumstances, this indicates there
is something which causes this, and I would suggest it's that the "and" here
has a verb-like feeling, maybe mentally interpreted as "accompanied by", which
makes the "me" seem natural.

So, for many people "X and me" is *always* the form that seems correct.
It is, of course, correct, except when it is the subject. However, for
people for whom "X and me" seems always correct, when they are told in some
circumstance that they are wrong to use "X and me" and should use "X and I",
since they really can't feel the logic of it they make the adjustment that
"X and me" is *always* wrong, and therefore try to replace it by "X and I" in
all circumstances.

As Donna has suggested, this is such a common phenomenon that there may now be
people who are using "X and I" in situations which are wrong according to
"correct English grammar", not because they are reacting to having been
told at an impressionable age not to use "X and I", but because they are
repeating what they have heard others (who were told that) say.

The situation is in a mess because people don't have a natural feel for it.
Personally I think this means we should give in and accept the natural
"X and me" in all circumstances. But English doesn't have any formal body which
can agree to this.

Matthew Huntbach
Roland Hutchinson - 17 Jan 2007 14:18 GMT
> As Donna has suggested, this is such a common phenomenon that there may
> now be people who are using "X and I" in situations which are wrong
> according to "correct English grammar", not because they are reacting to
> having been told at an impressionable age not to use "X and I", but
> because they are repeating what they have heard others (who were told
> that) say.

"Now" probably includes several generations, if not more.  I know at least
one person who has been talking that way for half a century, having learned
it as a natural part of her dialect.

Signature

Roland Hutchinson              Will play viola da gamba for food.

NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam.  If your message looks like spam I may not see it.

Robert Bannister - 17 Jan 2007 22:53 GMT
> The situation is in a mess because people don't have a natural feel for it.
> Personally I think this means we should give in and accept the natural
> "X and me" in all circumstances. But English doesn't have any formal
> body which
> can agree to this.

Off at a tangent, but following your suggestion of natural feel, it
seems to me that many people also have problems with paired genitive
phrases. This morning, I read "my wife and my 25th wedding anniversary".
It looks really strange in print, but I know I have heard similar
phrases quite often. It seems that "my wife's and my" somehow feels awkward.
Signature

Rob Bannister

jerry_friedman@yahoo.com - 17 Jan 2007 22:59 GMT
> > The situation is in a mess because people don't have a natural feel for it.
> > Personally I think this means we should give in and accept the natural
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> It looks really strange in print, but I know I have heard similar
> phrases quite often. It seems that "my wife's and my" somehow feels awkward.

Lucky you.  Around here it would be "my wife and my 25-year
anniversary".

Signature

Jerry Friedman

Donna Richoux - 18 Jan 2007 08:29 GMT
> > Off at a tangent, but following your suggestion of natural feel, it
> > seems to me that many people also have problems with paired genitive
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Lucky you.  Around here it would be "my wife and my 25-year
> anniversary".

Sometimes I just shouldn't look:
 
          "my * and I's"   49,100

Such as:

    combining my wife and I's two different ipods  
     
    What should I do for my wife and I's first Valentine's
     
    happens to be my husband and I's 9th anniversary
     
    going to solve all of my husband and I's problems

Where's P&D Schultz? He predicted this.

At first glance, it's a relieve to see that the count for "my * and my"
is nearly four million. But that's mostly things like "my aunt and my
sister"...

Signature

Best-- Donna Richoux

cybercypher - 18 Jan 2007 10:24 GMT
> jerry_friedman@yahoo.com <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>      
>      going to solve all of my husband and I's problems

Of course, you should look. This kind of arrant nonsense just
demonstrates how much such "language change" is driven by ignorance
and stupidity.

> Where's P&D Schultz? He predicted this.
>
> At first glance, it's a relieve

I'm sure it is, especially because you defend such crap as normal.

> to see that the count for "my * and my" is nearly four million.
> But that's mostly things like "my aunt and my sister"...

More evidence. Too bad it's not just the existence of angels that
we're talking about.

Signature

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan.
"If you are still not convinced of the a.s-brain connection, finish
this sentence: 'It is easier to think after I … (a) get a haircut    
(b) take a dump'." Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog, 12 Jan 2007;  
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/
teranews now charges a one-time US$3.95 setup fee

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

The Grammer Genious - 19 Jan 2007 02:23 GMT
<...>
>> Where's P&D Schultz? He predicted this.
>>
>> At first glance, it's a relief  <...>
>
> I'm sure it is, especially because you defend such crap as normal.
> <...>

Calling normal crap normal is a "defense"?

Your reasoning has gone all foggy again.

P&D S
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com - 18 Jan 2007 17:30 GMT
> > > Off at a tangent, but following your suggestion of natural feel, it
> > > seems to me that many people also have problems with paired genitive
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
>            "my * and I's"   49,100

Yes, I thought later that I could hear "my wife and I's 25-year
anniversary".

As long as we're doing this,

"tenth anniversary": 1,180,000
"10th anniversary": 3,250,000

"ten year anniversary": 308,000
"10 year anniversary": 977,000

I'm a bit surprised that the numerals are so much more common.

> Such as:
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Where's P&D Schultz? He predicted this.
...

If they don't show up, maybe The Grammer Genious would be interested
(or maybe he knows already).

Signature

Jerry Friedman

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.