Wordsmith.org
Posted By: latishya Origins of the Specious - 02/25/09 09:33 AM
A catchy name for a book
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/25/09 12:00 PM
Quote:
But an educated speaker is expected to keep his pronouns in line. Here, then, is a tip, Mr. President. Nobody chooses the wrong pronoun when it’s standing on its own. If you’re tempted to say “for Michelle and I” in tonight’s speech, just mentally omit Michelle (sorry, Mrs. Obama), and you’ll get it right. And no one will get on your case.


A) The tip is hard to apply when it's "correcting" between Michelle and I. Between me makes no sense whatsoever.

2) I hear this "error" more from the educated than from the uneducated.
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/25/09 01:01 PM
"The King and I". It just sounds classier, more educated.
It's a difference in style. The Queen and I had tea one day,
and many others too grin.
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/25/09 03:16 PM
Originally Posted By: Faldage

... The tip is hard to apply when it's "correcting" between Michelle and I. Between me makes no sense whatsoever.


Neither does between I.
Posted By: LukeJavan8 Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/25/09 06:38 PM


The KING AND ME. Doesn't do it for me.
Posted By: Jackie Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/26/09 03:03 AM
[skronk]! The Queen and I had tea is correct. "Tea was given to the Queen and I" would not be. "The King and I" seems much more correct than "The King and Me" would be, given that there's no antecedent. Therefore there's a natural expectation that something-or-other is to follow: the King & I did this, or were this, etc. [going out on a limb e]
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/26/09 12:38 PM
Or either, "this story is about the King and I."
Posted By: Buffalo Shrdlu Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/26/09 01:32 PM
one
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/26/09 05:06 PM
*sigh*
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/27/09 01:00 AM
Most of these things that "sound right to me" sound right because that's the way we're used to hearing them. If Anna and the King of Siam had been played and movied to The King and Me everyone would be saying that was what sounded right.
Posted By: Jackie Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/27/09 02:39 AM
"this story is about the King and I." ??? shocked
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/27/09 11:59 AM
Originally Posted By: Jackie
"this story is about the King and I." ??? shocked


Just a suggestion for why The King and Me might work. And I stand by my observation that if The King and Me had been the title all along those of y'all who have been saying that The King and I sounds right and The King and Me doesn't would be arguing out of the other side of y'all's sense of linguistic propriety. I've never heard anyone complaining about the Robert Lawson children's classic, Ben and Me. Note, too that he wrote a book called Mr. Revere and I.

You get the some sort of argument from folks who insist on retaining the moribund whom by appealing to the title of the Hemingway work, For Whom the Bell Tolls.
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/28/09 09:21 PM
I've never heard anyone complaining about the Robert Lawson children's classic, Ben and Me. Note, too that he wrote a book called Mr. Revere and I.

That's because Ben is just Ben (and me) and we are pals, and Mr. Revere is a man of some reverence and I owe him the respect of being an I.

The King and me would not work. I stand by this observation.
Posted By: latishya Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/28/09 09:47 PM
Originally Posted By: Faldage
folks who insist on retaining the moribund whom by appealing to the title of the Hemingway work, For Whom the Bell Tolls.


I agree that whom is moribund. Maybe Hemingway's title was a simple statement of that fact?
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 02/28/09 10:20 PM
smile
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 02:53 AM
Originally Posted By: latishya
Maybe Hemingway's title was a simple statement of that fact?


Hemingway's title was from John Donne's Meditation XVII, written in an era when whom was not moribund.
Posted By: latishya Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 03:10 AM
Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: latishya
Maybe Hemingway's title was a simple statement of that fact?


Hemingway's title was from John Donne's Meditation XVII, written in an era when whom was not moribund.


Sorry for atempting to make a joke.
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 09:01 AM
Apologies for a good one, Latishya? I hope you are not serious.
Posted By: LukeJavan8 Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 05:38 PM

Siam (Thailand) still has a king, and he is highly revered.
Posted By: latishya Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 07:49 PM
Originally Posted By: BranShea
Apologies for a good one, Latishya? I hope you are not serious.


My apology was to Faldage whose reply indicates that he (or she) read my post as serious.
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/01/09 08:39 PM
I guess I still don't understand how it was a joke. But then my sense of humor took a serious hit when I realized the René Descartes walked in to a bar joke relied on a logical fallacy.
Posted By: Jackie Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/02/09 02:51 AM
the René Descartes walked in to a bar joke Is that the one where he walks in in front of his horse?

Anna, it's nice to see your fonts again. wink
Posted By: tsuwm Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/02/09 04:08 AM
>the René Descartes walked in to a bar joke

more likely the one where the bartender asks if he wants a drink, he says, "I think not", and disappears.

-joe (yet another philosophy joke) friday
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/02/09 11:05 AM
laugh But I'm deeply disappointed with Faldage not being able to show some appreciation for 'for whom the bell tolls'. You don't need to call it a joke, but it is an amusing observation.
Posted By: TheFallibleFiend Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/03/09 07:07 PM
Originally Posted By: tsuwm
>the René Descartes walked in to a bar joke

more likely the one where the bartender asks if he wants a drink, he says, "I think not", and disappears.

-joe (yet another philosophy joke) friday


I always wondered the coordinates of the drunken fart's last engagement.
Posted By: tsuwm Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/03/09 07:20 PM
perforce, lyrics to The Philosopher's Drinking Song :
Immanuel Kant was a real piss-ant who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar who could think you under the table. ..

David Hume could out-consume Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.
There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach 'ya 'bout the raising of the wrist.
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.
John Stuart Mill, of his own free will, after half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.
Plato, they say, could stick it away, half a crate of whiskey every day!
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
And Hobbes was fond of his Dram.
And René Descartes was a drunken fart:
"I drink, therefore I am."

Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Posted By: BranShea Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/03/09 07:36 PM
Would they not posthumeously take this as a sort of shocked an insult?
All of their drunken spirits will haunt me in my dreams. Because
I LAUGHED.
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/03/09 10:21 PM
Originally Posted By: BranShea
laugh But I'm deeply disappointed with Faldage not being able to show some appreciation for 'for whom the bell tolls'. You don't need to call it a joke, but it is an amusing observation.


I am, too, and he's my husband. frown
Posted By: Avyy Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 02:05 AM
Originally Posted By: AnnaStrophic

I am, too, and he's my husband. frown


Good to know. I was wondering whether (and hoping) you'll were still together.
Posted By: tsuwm Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 02:34 AM
I've been wondering: is this Avy* from long ago and far away?!

*last posted ca. 2005
Posted By: Jackie Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 02:51 AM
Ooh, I HOPE so!!! Dearest One, are you back with us?
Posted By: Buffalo Shrdlu Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 02:56 AM
zowie! looking back at some old Avy threads bring back lots of names.
Posted By: olly Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 03:17 AM
Aaah, the wisdom of the elders.
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 03:28 AM
BTW, I finally got what Latishya was getting at. It is pretty good.
Posted By: Avyy Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 10:06 AM
Originally Posted By: tsuwm
*last posted ca. 2005


It's been that long?
Actually yeah... 3-4 years ago I fell off the truck... bump! Ouch!
Hi tsu, Hi jackie, Hi eta, Hi fal Saab, Hi ana.
Great to be amongst old friends.
Posted By: Buffalo Shrdlu Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/04/09 10:42 AM
yay!!

welcome back!!
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Avy(y) - 03/04/09 01:39 PM
Welcome back! smile
Posted By: Faldage Re: Avy(y) - 03/05/09 12:01 AM
Welcome back. Have the letters in your handle been breeding?
Posted By: Zed Re: Avy(y) - 03/05/09 12:36 AM
Be nice, if a handle gains a little around the middle in 3 or 4 years it is more polite to just pretend you don't notice.
Posted By: Avyy Re: Avy(y) - 03/05/09 01:46 AM
Originally Posted By: Zed
Be nice, if a handle gains a little around the middle in 3 or 4 years it is more polite to just pretend you don't notice.

Quote:
Welcome back. Have the letters in your handle been breeding?

laugh laugh laugh laugh
Posted By: Jackie Re: Avy(y) - 03/05/09 03:23 AM
Have the letters in your handle been breeding? So--now she has...wait for it...love handles!

YAYY, I'm so glad to see you here again!!!
Posted By: zmjezhd Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 12:39 PM
Or either, "this story is about the King and I."

1. *I read The King and Me yesterday.
2. I read The King and I yesterday.

Reminds me of not declining hoi polloi when used as a direct or indirect object.

I have always thought that the usage between Mary and I was simple hypercorrection. It is different from "Me and Mary went downtown last night."
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 01:01 PM
Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
Or either, "this story is about the King and I."

1. *I read The King and Me yesterday.
2. I read The King and I yesterday.

Reminds me of not declining hoi polloi when used as a direct or indirect object.


My comment was in response to a rationale for the title, not about its proper use in a grammatically correct English sentence.
Posted By: zmjezhd Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 02:04 PM
My comment was in response to a rationale for the title, not about its proper use in a grammatically correct English sentence.

And mine was simply a musing of mine own.
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 04:21 PM
Speaking of which. I know that proper names are declined in Russian but are book or movie titles declined, too?
Posted By: zmjezhd Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 04:23 PM
I know that proper names are declined in Russian but are book or movie titles declined, too?

Good question, I'll have to ask one of my KGB informants ...
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 04:34 PM
Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
one of my KGB informants ...


I'm an OGPU man myself.

Okefenokee Glee and Perloo Union
Posted By: tsuwm Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 04:40 PM
you both could be gulagged for lack of resp... <ack>
Posted By: zmjezhd Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/08/09 04:48 PM
OGPU man

Cheka, mate.
Posted By: zmjezhd Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/09/09 06:45 PM
I know that proper names are declined in Russian but are book or movie titles declined, too?

Yes, they are.
Posted By: Faldage Re: Origins of the Specious - 03/09/09 10:55 PM
Cnacubo.
© Wordsmith.org