Okay, people, it's not that hard. You just ask yourself, "what would I say if I wasn't sharing this sentence with someone else?"
So, if you felt compelled to write the sentence:
"I don't think this will effect the work Lynn and myself are doing with that room."
You should simply remove Lynn and see how the sentence reads without her:
"I don't think this will effect the work myself am doing with that room."
Doesn't sound right, does it?
That's because it's WRONG. Really, really WRONG. So WRONG it almost eclipses the incorrect use of the word "effect" in that sentence. Almost, but not quite.
To the person who originally wrote that sentence, I say this:
"That's not quite right."
Oh, come on, like there's any point in correcting people these days. No one cares. No one listens. No one wants to know. No one wants to hang out with you afterwards...
Why don't you all just forget there's such a thing as case in the English language (yeah, you heard me, I said the English language has cases!) and just use whatever pronouns you feel like. We all know you will anyway.
To me the use of 'I' as the second pronominal argument sounds stilted. Furthermore the use of 'me' carries with it emphasis that is missing in 'I'. Of course it all depends on on your idolect, dialect and speech community but if I used 'I' in my speech community people would start asking if I woke up on the wrong side of the bed that morning. In you case, on the otherside of the world with a very different speech community, other rules apply.
ReplyDeleteNot really. The folks on my side of the world think it's pointless and toffee-nosed to use the correct personal pronouns, too.
ReplyDeleteThat's my main beef, right there. For some reason, every version of English is okay and acceptable in general society except the "correct" one.
It's like the entire English speaking world has decided to put its hands on its hips and declare: "you can't tell me what to do!" So anything that sounds remotely like "correct" or "standard" English is a no-no.
I belongs in that sentence. You could say it's I's natural habitat. It's the nominative form of the pronoun sitting in the nominative position in the clause. What could be more natural?
So, why does it seem to border on the controversial whenever I suggest using it?
And, yes, I know the "correct" form of a language is completely arbitrary. However, we have to have it precisely because your culture on your side of the world has a "very different speech community" to my culture on my side of the world.
"Standard English" is the common ground where we all meet. It's kind of like the use of Latin in science - it's old-fashioned, static stuffiness is an advantage as it provides a common framework. I don't need to know or keep up with the latest colloquialisms and idioms in your culture and you don't need to keep up with mine. We can both switch to the "Queen's English" and understand each other. Whatever cultural idiosyncrasies we may add to the frame will serve to make the language poetic, rather than incomprehensible. It will still keep a recognisable shape.
No one seems to appreciate that, any more...
Yes. I can see your point. Standard English does get alot of stick these days and has fallen somewhat out of favour. The wheel seems to have turned full circle, at least outside the formal language lesson setting.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I will say that when I am written formal communications or in conversation in a formal situation I will shift my language to suit that occasion. Also if I am talking with non-native speakers I will also follow more standardised rules. It's only fair after all. It's not that I don't use formal English; I just reserve it for certain situations.
The funny thing is that the more Estonian I learn to more I become introduced to informal structures and the more I have substituted those for the ones taught in the textbooks. You won't now find me saying kakskymmend but rather kaksgend. That's however something I will have to remedy for my Estonian test next year!