|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:02 am Post subject: Re: Grammar question "I or me" |
 |
|
| unknown9398 wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
which of these is correct?
A. My father is faster than I.
B. My father is faster than me.
C. My father is faster than I am. |
B is correct, because when the self is referred to as the object, the correct usage is "me." I suppose C may also be correct, but it's not as succinct as B. |
Of what verb do you contend "me" to be the object?
Seriously. On page one I supplied a fairly clear explanation and authoritative links that should have ended this satisfactorily.
If people want to argue over prescriptivism (because yes, in common spoken usage "B" is correct, probably even moreso than "A"), that's fine. But arguing over the rule on this matter is a waste of time and an admission of inadequate grammar study. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:43 am Post subject: Re: Grammar question "I or me" |
|
|
| faster wrote: |
| unknown9398 wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
which of these is correct?
A. My father is faster than I.
B. My father is faster than me.
C. My father is faster than I am. |
B is correct, because when the self is referred to as the object, the correct usage is "me." I suppose C may also be correct, but it's not as succinct as B. |
Of what verb do you contend "me" to be the object?
Seriously. On page one I supplied a fairly clear explanation and authoritative links that should have ended this satisfactorily.
If people want to argue over prescriptivism (because yes, in common spoken usage "B" is correct, probably even moreso than "A"), that's fine. But arguing over the rule on this matter is a waste of time and an admission of inadequate grammar study. |
Tha'ts what I was trying to say. Guess these people are just stubborn. One who actually has the audacity to question some of us as teachers. I can understand how someone may be confused and totally think that 'me' is right in this case, and even argue about it, but when it's pointed out to them that it's so obviously not the case, they still won't hear it.
I've argued about things on this site and found out I was wrong. And I admitted so. Why don't they do the same? Because they're stubborn and don't want to look stupid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
In my humble opinion, it is instructive to remember, and to always think of, "than" as a conjunction. Whatever follows it is a form of a clause. Usually the clause is abbreviated to the subject only. When the objective case appears after "than," it must be assumed that the subject is omitted. Following this rule, and assuming the writer is not sloppy, there is no uncertainty or ambiguity.
I am taller than he. = I am taller than he is tall.
I like her more than him. = I like her more than I like him.
I like her more than he (does). = I like her more than he likes her.
The common usage (than + objective case) is just a reflection of the (charitably speaking) fluidity of native speech. That it sounds more right than the more precise form (than + subjective case) has no foundation at all in any logic, accuracy, precision, or even nuance. But... that's native speech--sloppy, confused, lazy.
What if a question is asked: Are we going to do away with the distinct forms of the subjective and the objective pronouns? Even considering the idiocy of (most) English native speech, I don't think people are willing to take this step. If so, then why TF mess things up and with sloppy thinking and behavior (=sloppy language). Grented, speech happens in context and there are many ways of being clear as well as nuanced. But many recent developments in English (and other languages) appear to be regressions.
Thinking further: If you pay careful attention to any generally accepted native speech, you will notice that the kind of language spoken has almost no relationship to the sophistication (or precision or richness) of the spoken language. The language (thoughts and understanding of relations of self to things and others) behind the appearance (English, French, whatever) is just a jumble of confusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| arjuna wrote: |
In my humble opinion, it is instructive to remember, and to always think of, "than" as a conjunction. Whatever follows it is a form of a clause. Usually the clause is abbreviated to the subject only. When the objective case appears after "than," it must be assumed that the subject is omitted. Following this rule, and assuming the writer is not sloppy, there is no uncertainty or ambiguity.
I am taller than he. = I am taller than he is tall.
I like her more than him. = I like her more than I like him.
I like her more than he (does). = I like her more than he likes her.
The common usage (than + objective case) is just a reflection of the (charitably speaking) fluidity of native speech. That it sounds more right than the more precise form (than + subjective case) has no foundation at all in any logic, accuracy, precision, or even nuance. But... that's native speech--sloppy, confused, lazy.
What if a question is asked: Are we going to do away with the distinct forms of the subjective and the objective pronouns? Even considering the idiocy of (most) English native speech, I don't think people are willing to take this step. If so, then why TF mess things up and with sloppy thinking and behavior (=sloppy language). Grented, speech happens in context and there are many ways of being clear as well as nuanced. But many recent developments in English (and other languages) appear to be regressions.
Thinking further: If you pay careful attention to any generally accepted native speech, you will notice that the kind of language spoken has almost no relationship to the sophistication (or precision or richness) of the spoken language. The language (thoughts and understanding of relations of self to things and others) behind the appearance (English, French, whatever) is just a jumble of confusion. |
It's just like when we say "There's a lot of oranges". It should be "There are a lot of oranges". "There's" is used over "There are" when it shouldn't be. But do we teach that? I might point out to students that we'll most often use "me" when we shouldn't, but that it's not grammatically correct. Same with the "there's/there are" deal. But at least I tell them what's correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| arjuna wrote: |
| you will notice that the kind of language spoken has almost no relationship to the sophistication (or precision or richness) of the spoken language. |
Huh? Is the second "spoken" supposed to be "written"? If so I totally disagree. The vaguenesses and slangs, the "um"s and "dude"s of casual spoken language communicate SO MUCH. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
browneyedgirl
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| karma police wrote: |
please stop me from ever taking a grammar test in America, then, girl...
hey, what else do you have going for you besides your cool username and refreshing intelligence, browneyes?  |
Other than breaking hearts and fending off ninjas at night, not much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So what do you teach your students? I've always taught them "He is faster than me", because I didn't know it was gramatically incorrect and because that was always the way it was presented in the books. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| faster wrote: |
| arjuna wrote: |
| you will notice that the kind of language spoken has almost no relationship to the sophistication (or precision or richness) of the spoken language. |
Huh? Is the second "spoken" supposed to be "written"? If so I totally disagree. The vaguenesses and slangs, the "um"s and "dude"s of casual spoken language communicate SO MUCH. |
I meant what I wrote. "Kind" refers to the different languages of the world. "Sophistication, precision, richness" refer to the degree to which the languages show those qualities. I was just making an observation that all spoken languages are about equally vague.
But I also agree with what you say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mack4289 wrote: |
| So what do you teach your students? I've always taught them "He is faster than me", because I didn't know it was gramatically incorrect and because that was always the way it was presented in the books. |
Whoa...what books?
My students are high schoolers going to the US for college, so I have the luxury of being able to teach them the nuance, although I emphasize the orthodox "rule," since they're all in the midst of standardized test preparation.
If I were teaching younger, less fluent students, I'd probably focus on the rules and omit the nuances, since their most immediate need for English competency is for high school and university entrance exams (and later, presumably, TOEIC). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karma police
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Location: all roads lead to where you are...
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| browneyedgirl wrote: |
| karma police wrote: |
please stop me from ever taking a grammar test in America, then, girl...
hey, what else do you have going for you besides your cool username and refreshing intelligence, browneyes? |
Other than breaking hearts and fending off ninjas at night, not much. |
tease |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anyway, we're here to teach the to speak English. Getting too involved in this and that is just stupid. Fk their stupid English tests. Nuances are important in speaking English because if you make them speak using all the grammar rules, they'll sound like robots. Screw the tests. One book that's good is Cutting Edge. It may be British, but it teaches different forms of speaking like I'll going to Seoul this weekend instead of I'm going to go to Seoul..., etc. Future forms. English has different forms. Better to say that rather than "nuances". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yingwenlaoshi wrote: |
| I'll going to Seoul this weekend |
Huh? Is this a typo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| faster wrote: |
| yingwenlaoshi wrote: |
| I'll going to Seoul this weekend |
Huh? Is this a typo? |
Yes. Should be "I'm". Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unknown9398
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Location: Yeongcheon, S. Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:29 am Post subject: Re: Grammar question "I or me" |
|
|
| yingwenlaoshi wrote: |
| unknown9398 wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
which of these is correct?
A. My father is faster than I.
B. My father is faster than me.
C. My father is faster than I am. |
B is correct, because when the self is referred to as the object, the correct usage is "me." I suppose C may also be correct, but it's not as succinct as B. |
Another genius talking out of his arse. |
http://www.arts.uottawa.ca/writcent/hypergrammar/pronouns.html
Btw, could you turn down your arrogance just a tad?
Last edited by unknown9398 on Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karma police
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Location: all roads lead to where you are...
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yingwenlaoshi wrote: |
| faster wrote: |
| yingwenlaoshi wrote: |
| I'll going to Seoul this weekend |
Huh? Is this a typo? |
Yes. Should be "I'm". Sorry. |
no, it should read, "i'm." <punctuation inside the quotation marks, hemingway...>  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
