# Between you and I / ME



## Proserpina87

Just between you and I / ME , I think Tom is going to lose his job.

¿Cual es la forma correcta? Realmente no lo entiendo!!!


----------



## Outsider

I'm not sure, but I think that "between you and me" is the correct phrase. "Between" is a preposition, and after prepositions you use the objective form of pronouns (me, you, him, her...) 
In Spanish, the preposition "entre" is an exception: you must use the subjective form with it (yo, tú, él, ella...)
But wait for more replies.


----------



## Reina140

I believe the proper way to say it would be "Between you and I"   

Heather and I went to the store.

Heather and me went to the store . . . very commonly said, but not very good grammar


----------



## Outsider

But shouldn't the pronouns used in "between you and me/I" be the same as those used in "between me and you"? I don't think it would be right to say "between I and you"...


----------



## Reina140

Again between me and you is not very good grammar

Rule 8. Reflexive pronouns—_myself, himself, herself, itself, themselves, ourselves, yourself, yourselves_—should be used only when they refer to a previous word in the sentence.  Correct _I did it myself._  Incorrect _My brother and myself did it._  The word _myself_ does not refer back to another word.  Correct _My brother and I did it._  Incorrect _Please give it to John or myself._  Correct _Please give it to John or me._ 


I guess that they both work but "I" is more formal and just plain sounds better/more educated


----------



## Ana_Fi

Reina140 said:


> Heather and I went to the store.


I don't think it's the same case, in your example, 'Heather' and 'I' are the subject.
Heather went to the store.
I went to the store.
Heather and I went to the store.

This is for Heather.
This is for me.
This is for Heather and me.


----------



## 1234plet

Hi,
It is called 'between you and me'.

You don't put yourself first in a sentence, that is actually very rude, though I might do it myself. 
And the reason it's 'me' is that if you removed 'you and' you would have: Between me
And you wouldn't say: Between I

If anyone understands?

But still I believe you *can *say 'Between you and I', but I think the other one, 'Between you and me' is more commonly used. And they are both correct.

But still, Ana Fi is right.


----------



## Reina140

This is 
correct

Rule 8. 

 . . . both ways are acceptable
Reflexive pronouns—_myself, himself, herself, itself, themselves, ourselves, yourself, yourselves_—should be used only when they refer to a previous word in the sentence. 
 Correct _I did it myself._  Incorrect _My brother and myself did it._  The word _myself_ does not refer back to another word.  Correct _My brother and I did it._  Incorrect _Please give it to John or myself._  Correct _Please give it to John or me._ 
http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/exercises/pronoun1.asp 






_The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
©1977–2006 by Jane Straus
MILL VALLEY, CA  USA_
_All Rights Reserved _​


----------



## Outsider

Reina140 said:


> Rule 8.
> 
> . . . both ways are acceptable
> Reflexive pronouns—_myself, himself, herself, itself, themselves, ourselves, yourself, yourselves_—should be used only when they refer to a previous word in the sentence.


This query has nothing to do with reflexive pronouns.


----------



## ampurdan

I think it should be "me" because it's not a subject.


----------



## Jenniferrrr

I find it helps to think of it like this:

You and me = Us
You and I = We

between you and me = between us  
between you and I = between we  

Heather and I went to the store = we went to the store  
Heather and me went to the store = us went to the store


----------



## Summer_rose

Reina, what you said is correct, but Ana Fi is right as well.

_ My brother and I did it    _(beacause "I" is the subject)
_They gave it to my brother and me  _(because "me" is the object)

You can read the link posted by QUIJOTE if you don't agree. Regarding the original question of this thread, I think the correct sentence would be:

_Between you and me_ 
Because it's the same as saying_: This is between you and me

_Regards. Summer.


----------



## konungursvia

It is definitely not between you and I. It is between you and me, just as outsider says: when an object, I'm "me", when a subject, it is "I". Similarly, "That's what he said to me" + "That's what he said to her" = "That's what he said to her and me." Exception: Jamaica, where I and me are reversed. "Old pirates they rob I... Sold I to the merchant ships."


----------



## Joey.

"Between you and ME" es lo unico correcto.
-Joe


----------



## geostan

Between you and I.

This is a case of hypercorrection. When we were growing up, teachers were always telling us that "me" was wrong in many situations. Some of us developed phobias about "me", and started putting "I" where it didn't belong.

"Between" is a preposition, just like "for, except, with, without."
You would never say: "with I, without I, for I, except I." It is the same with between.


----------



## Proserpina87

wow Thank you very very much!

Muchisimas gracias a todos.


----------



## JackInMadrid

One point about "I" and "me" concerning them as subjects.

"My brother and I went to the shop" sounds a bit formal
"Me and my brother went to the shop" sounds normal

"Chris and I are going to Amsterdam" sounds a bit formal
"Me and Chris are going to Amsterdam" sounds normal

The second form is the most normal, most colloquial.

NOTE: these are wrong! 
my brother and me went to the shop
Chris and me are going to Amsterdam

Jack


----------



## konungursvia

"Me and my brother" is a common form, but belongs to the lower oral register of regional dialects among uneducated socials strata.


----------



## JackInMadrid

Perhaps in Canada but not in the UK, it's the norm here.

Jack


----------



## Ivy29

JackInMadrid said:


> One point about "I" and "me" concerning them as subjects.
> 
> "My brother and I went to the shop" sounds a bit formal
> "Me and my brother went to the shop" sounds normal
> 
> "Chris and I are going to Amsterdam" sounds a bit formal
> "Me and Chris are going to Amsterdam" sounds normal
> 
> The second form is the most normal, most colloquial.
> 
> NOTE: these are wrong!
> my brother and me went to the shop
> Chris and me are going to Amsterdam
> 
> Jack


 
John and I ( me) very colloquial with me.

AFTER the verb to be = It is I, It is he ( overcorrect) because the linking verbs are JUST LINKS.

Between you and me ( CORRECT FORM) prepositions requires object pronouns.

Source Michael SWAN.page 425 numeral 2.

Ivy29


----------



## Geoff Jordan

Subject pronoun: I
Object pronoun: me
Ergo: Between you and me


----------



## TheMexican

If you add more elements to the phrase to create a full sentence it can help clarify this dilemma.

* John is playing between you and I.

Now substitute both elements with the correct pronoun. Would you say:


* He is playing between we.

Or

He is playing between us.  


The use of you and I or you and me really depends on the role they play within a sentence.


----------



## Geoff Jordan

Sorry, but no.  Subject and object pronoun use does not allow this


----------



## TheMexican

Doesn't allow what? If you mean the lack of an antecent, I agree.


----------



## Geoff Jordan

The use of a subject pronoun when the object is referred to doesn't allow the contrary.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

There's a lot of over-analysing going on in this thread. Normal speakers (and even many writers) of languages don't usually care too much about what forms 'should' be used, what's accusative or a preposition. Shakespeare famously used 'between you and I' and although it sounds horrid to the self-appointed guardians of language correctness (and to me!), ultimately the weight of usage ALWAYS decides what's correct, irrespective of what it says in a dictionary or grammar manual.


----------



## Outsider

But wouldn't most native speakers say "between you and me", anyway? That's what I recall hearing most often. In this case, prescription and description seem to agree.


----------



## TheMexican

Geoff Jordan said:


> The use of a subject pronoun when the object is referred to doesn't allow the contrary.


 
Agreed. It was done for illustrative purposes only. However, I see that I've failed miserably as the confusion continues!  

Again, I will try the substitution. 

Would you say:

between you and she or between you and her

between you and he or between you and him

between you and we or between you and us

between you and they or between you and them

If it's still not clear, perhaps if we substitute the preposition.

1. The fog was *around *me or The fog was around I?
2. The drop landed *on* me or The drop landed on I?
3. Dan got here *before* me or Dan got here before I?


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Outsider said:


> But wouldn't most native speakers say "between you and me", anyway? That's what I recall hearing most often. In this case, prescription and description seem to agree.



Yes, definitely -- and me too


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

TheMexican said:


> Agreed. It was done for illustrative purposes only. However, I see that I've failed miserably as the confusion continues!
> 
> Again, I will try the substitution.
> 
> Would you say:
> 
> between you and she or between you and her
> 
> between you and he or between you and him
> 
> between you and we or between you and us
> 
> between you and they or between you and them
> 
> If it's still not clear, perhaps if we substitute the preposition.
> 
> 1. The fog was *around *me or The fog was around I?
> 2. The drop landed *on* me or The drop landed on I?
> 3. Dan got here *before* me or Dan got here before I?



These are illustrative examples, but still beside the point: if enough people say 'between you and I' (and if Americans have their linguistic way, that looks like the eventual outcome), then that will become the 'rule', irrespective of what is logical or previously 'correct'.


----------



## TheMexican

Yes, the usage dictates the rules. So two wrongs make a right?  

I was just watching Friends and I heard Rachel say: The idea of you and he... Eeek! Talk about overgeneralization of the rule!


----------



## Geoff Jordan

I really don't get the confusion.  Surely, it's obvious: "I" is the subject pronoun and "me" is object pronoun. "Me and my wife" offends the rule.  "He gave it to my wife and me" doesn't.


----------



## TheMexican

@ GJ: That's exactly where the confusion lies. If we went and asked any native speaker to explain the difference between these two grammatical categories and tell us when they should be used, not everyone would know. 

I think it would be easy to mix up the two. Imagine someone saying to the teacher: Me and my dad went to the movies. The teacher then corrects the speaker: You don't say 'me and my dad, you say my dad and I'. Imagine being corrected a few times for using me instead of I. You're eventually going to overgeneralize that rule. 


They say something like: You and me should go out for drinks.


----------



## Geoff Jordan

We bump up against use and usage.  I'm just saying that the grammar - the usage - is clear.  What people do with the language is another thing.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

TheMexican said:


> Yes, the usage dictates the rules. So two wrongs make a right?



But that's just the point: the only real right is what the language's speakers decide.



TheMexican said:


> I was just watching Friends and I heard Rachel say: The idea of you and he... Eeek! Talk about overgeneralization of the rule!



It may be inelegant, but there's nothing inherently 'wrong' about it. Welsh, for example, has no object pronouns as such -- the subject pronouns are used throughout. And how would you feel about "The idea of you and him going" -- better or worse than "The idea of you and he going"?


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Geoff Jordan said:


> I really don't get the confusion.  Surely, it's obvious: "I" is the subject pronoun and "me" is object pronoun. "Me and my wife" offends the rule.  "He gave it to my wife and me" doesn't.



Where's that rule written in stone? Who deemed it a rule? You're talking about *conventions*, NOT *laws*!


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Geoff Jordan said:


> We bump up against use and usage.  I'm just saying that the grammar - the usage - is clear.  What people do with the language is another thing.



Usage isn't grammar. What people do with the language is usage. And what people do with the language is also, ultimately, grammar.


----------



## pinkgurl4433

you would have to have the phrase to be 





> you and me


, because if you take away one of the pronouns meaning (you, or me). The sentence should still make sense.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

pinkgurl4433 said:


> you would have to have the phrase to be , because if you take away one of the pronouns meaning (you, or me). The sentence should still make sense.



Even though I agree with you that 'between you and me' is better (sounds more educated), 'between you and I' nevertheless makes perfect sense; there's no question that any native speaker could somehow misinterpret the 'I'.


----------



## Geoff Jordan

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Usage isn't grammar. What people do with the language is usage. And what people do with the language is also, ultimately, grammar.


 
You're quite right, my mistake.  I write too quickly!  There is a traditional distinction made between use and usage - use referring to the rules.  So I meant to say that whatever the grammarians might say, the usage of the language will ultimately decide.  Nevertheless, questions of grammar are intersting. Grammar rules are not prescriptive, but interesting.


----------



## Geoff Jordan

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Where's that rule written in stone? Who deemed it a rule? You're talking about *conventions*, NOT *laws*!


 
I agree. Nothing is written in stone. There are no laws. Just grammar. Which is what we're interested in, right? 

There's pedagogical grammar, (I think Michael Swan does it best), and then there's transformational grammar (Radford, maybe) and deep grammar ( Chomsky, the king). All we're doing, I think, is mulling over some points of "rules" that might govern the way English is used.


----------



## gaer

Outsider said:


> But wouldn't most native speakers say "between you and me", anyway? That's what I recall hearing most often. In this case, prescription and description seem to agree.


Results 1 - 10 of about 13,400 for "between my wife and me".
Results 1 - 10 of about 27,400 for "between my wife and I". 

Suprised? I was!

And that's in writing. 

Gaer


----------



## Outsider

Indeed! Hypercorrection?...


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Geoff Jordan said:


> There is a traditional distinction made between use and usage - use referring to the rules.  So I meant to say that whatever the grammarians might say, the usage of the language will ultimately decide.  Nevertheless, questions of grammar are intersting. Grammar rules are not prescriptive, but interesting.



With all of this I couldn't agree more


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

gaer said:


> Results 1 - 10 of about 13,400 for "between my wife and me".
> Results 1 - 10 of about 27,400 for "between my wife and I".
> 
> Suprised? I was!
> 
> And that's in writing.
> 
> Gaer



Though most webpages are American in origin, I'm nevertheless surprised too. However, many 'hits' turned up by search engines actually reveal the same single source -- with wordings plagiarised or quoted or newsfed. But still, it could be the shape of things to come :-(


----------



## geostan

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Though most webpages are American in origin, I'm nevertheless surprised too. However, many 'hits' turned up by search engines actually reveal the same single source -- with wordings plagiarised or quoted or newsfed. But still, it could be the shape of things to come :-(



Why should you be surprised? In all areas of society, adherence to grammar is fast disappearing. As I suggested earlier, this particular instance is a case of hypercorrection. And it is a force to be reckoned with. 

As for grammar rules not being prescriptive, they used to be. Now, the people who know least about the function of language are determining usage. More's the pity. 

Those of us who care about language can at least retain their own respect and continue to use what they consider to be proper.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

geostan said:


> Why should you be surprised? In all areas of society, adherence to grammar is fast disappearing. As I suggested earlier, this particular instance is a case of hypercorrection. And it is a force to be reckoned with.
> 
> As for grammar rules not being prescriptive, they used to be. Now, the people who know least about the function of language are determining usage. More's the pity.
> 
> Those of us who care about language can at least retain their own respect and continue to use what they consider to be proper.



Your last sentence is certainly true, but otherwise you're obviously labouring under a misapprehension as to the nature of language.

People still adhere to grammar as much as ever; otherwise we wouldn't understand each other. Grammar is a distillation of current usage, nothing more. Rules are what we native speakers make them.

Prescription has always existed, but it's on the wane because grammarians (cf Fowler) have realised that you can prescribe all you want but few will ever listen. Prescription only came about because a few people were sufficiently wealthy, learned and powerful to appoint themselves language guardians, and they based their rules on what they thought was good usage -- generally the writings and constructions of the Romans and Greeks.

But the masses have never cared much for Cicero or Homer, and they went on speaking like 'barbarians' -- making their own conventions and adapting as the need or pressure arose. That's language.


----------



## Outsider

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Prescription has always existed, but it's on the wane because grammarians (cf Fowler) have realised that you can prescribe all you want but few will ever listen.


Juding from the Google results Gaer listed above, a considerable number of speakers listened to the rule that you should use "I" rather than "me" after conjunctions, even though they didn't understand it very well.


----------



## Ivy29

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Your last sentence is certainly true, but otherwise you're obviously labouring under a misapprehension as to the nature of language.
> 
> People still adhere to grammar as much as ever; otherwise we wouldn't understand each other. Grammar is a distillation of current usage, nothing more. Rules are what we native speakers make them.
> 
> Prescription has always existed, but it's on the wane because grammarians (cf Fowler) have realised that you can prescribe all you want but few will ever listen. Prescription only came about because a few people were sufficiently wealthy, learned and powerful to appoint themselves language guardians, and they based their rules on what they thought was good usage -- generally the writings and constructions of the Romans and Greeks.
> 
> But the masses have never cared much for Cicero or Homer, and they went on speaking like 'barbarians' -- making their own conventions and adapting as the need or pressure arose. That's language.


 
*WE MUST differenciate PARLANCE ( JARGON) and LANGUAGE. With parlance we almost need to learn OTHER LANGUAGE. The same here in my city, in some areas you need an INTERPRETER.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Outsider said:


> Juding from the Google results Gaer listed above, a considerable number of speakers listened to the rule that you should use "I" rather than "me" after conjunctions, even though they didn't understand it very well.



I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me, but what Google shows supports my point: that usage will win out. It's not a 'rule' (except in certain grammar books) to use either 'me' or 'I', but a convention of usage.

Incidentally, 'correct' Spanish -- according to all the grammars -- deems 'entre tú y yo' to be correct, even though those same grammars AND usage require 'para ti/mi'. So logic's got nothing to do with it!


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Ivy29 said:


> *WE MUST differenciate PARLANCE ( JARGON) and LANGUAGE. With parlance we almost need to learn OTHER LANGUAGE. The same here in my city, in some areas you need an INTERPRETER.*
> 
> *Ivy29*



What you say is true, and I understand you; but anyone who expects learning a language to be a logical and linear process is under an illusion. As is anyone who thinks that a 'language' is something that you can define precisely, let alone encapsulate in a grammar or dictionary!


----------



## Outsider

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me, but what Google shows supports my point: that usage will win out. It's not a 'rule' (except in certain grammar books) to use either 'me' or 'I', but a convention of usage.


I was disagreeing with you, in the sense that I think usage does not always predate prescription. In this particular case, I would guess that the usage of "I" instead of "me" was shaped by prescription. A misunderstood prescription, but nevertheless a prescription.



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Incidentally, 'correct' Spanish -- according to all the grammars -- deems 'entre tú y yo' to be correct, even though those same grammars AND usage require 'para ti/mi'. So logic's got nothing to do with it!


Yes, some prepositions take pronouns in the subjective case, rather than the objective case, in Spanish. I suppose the logic, in the case of the preposition "entre", is that it normally connects two nouns which are regarded as having an equal standing in the sentence. It's like using the subjective case with copulas.


----------



## Ivy29

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> What you say is true, and I understand you; but anyone who expects learning a language to be a logical and linear process is under an illusion. As is anyone who thinks that a 'language' is something that you can define precisely, let alone encapsulate in a grammar or dictionary!


 
BUT STILL the grammar and syntax are the PROPER WEAVING to learn as ADULTS a language, just in here is THE PROPER SOUL and beauty within harmony .
Ivy29


----------



## gaer

Outsider said:


> Indeed! Hypercorrection?...


I think it's partially hypercorrection, and maybe MOSTLY that.

Gaer


----------



## gaer

Outsider said:


> I was disagreeing with you, in the sense that I think usage does not always predate prescription. In this particular case, I would guess that the usage of "I" instead of "me" was shaped by prescription. A misunderstood prescription, but nevertheless a prescription.


I think you've made an excellent point, one especially valid in the past. I can think of examples that would support that idea that a few people, having appointed themselves as "Guardians of the Language", have been followed with great loyalty by people who knew very little, and over time their opinions have become absorbed in a way that affects usage right up to this moment.

Gaer


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Outsider said:


> I was disagreeing with you, in the sense that I think usage does not always predate prescription. In this particular case, I would guess that the usage of "I" instead of "me" was shaped by prescription. A misunderstood prescription, but nevertheless a prescription.



As 'I' is an Old Germanic word, and 'me' is from Latin, who knows what the first combinations sounded like!! Having said that though: usage must always predate prescription by definition, because usage originates in spoken language and prescription in the written language -- and (a few esoteric situations apart) spoken always comes before written historically.



Outsider said:


> Yes, some prepositions take pronouns in the subjective case, rather than the objective case, in Spanish. I suppose the logic, in the case of the preposition "entre", is that it normally connects two nouns which are regarded as having an equal standing in the sentence. It's like using the subjective case with copulas.



In that case though: as 'entre' and 'between' both mean, er, 'between', what goes for one language should go for another, otherwise the implication (by this 'logic' argument) is that one nationality is less logical than another!


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Ivy29 said:


> BUT STILL the grammar and syntax are the PROPER WEAVING to learn as ADULTS a language, just in here is THE PROPER SOUL and beauty within harmony .
> Ivy29



Er...claro :-/


----------



## Outsider

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> As 'I' is an Old Germanic word, and 'me' is from Latin, who knows what the first combinations sounded like!!


Actually, _me_ is a Germanic pronoun, too. Compare it with German _mich_. 
Or, more precisely, it's Indo-European: compare with Welsh _mi_.



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Having said that though: usage must always predate prescription by definition, because usage originates in spoken language and prescription in the written language -- and (a few esoteric situations apart) spoken always comes before written historically.


I don't necessarily agree that prescription originates in the written language. Were you never corrected by your parents when you were learning to speak?
But, even assuming that the kind of prescription we're talking about here originates in written grammars, that does not mean it couldn't have affected speech. The moment most people started to go to school, and to learn to write, it became possible for prescritive writers, or teachers, to influence them. I think this may be what has happened in this case:

Stage 1: everyone says "between you and me".
Stage 2: at school, teacher says it's wrong to say "you and me" when this is a subject, but students only get the part about it being wrong to say "you and me".
Stage 3: many people change to saying, or at least writing, "you and I" in all circumstances, even after a preposition.

I think this illustrates the dangers of prescription. It's no so much that it never works, but that when it does work what is taught may be misunderstood, creating more errors and more confusion, instead of simplifying or preserving the grammar.



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> In that case though: as 'entre' and 'between' both mean, er, 'between', what goes for one language should go for another, otherwise the implication (by this 'logic' argument) is that one nationality is less logical than another!


I disagree that what goes for one language should go for another. There is no logical criterium by which you can decide which case should follow the preposition "between/entre". Each language comes up with its own solution, and no solution is objectively better than the others. It's a matter of convention. 
English has pragmatically decided that _all prepositions shall be followed by the objective case, period_. Spanish makes a more subtle distinction between prepositions which equate nouns, and prepositions with an "uneven" meaning. They are both right; they have just interpreted an ambivalent situation in different ways.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Outsider said:


> Actually, _me_ is a Germanic pronoun, too. Compare it with German _mich_.
> Or, more precisely, it's Indo-European: compare with Welsh _mi_.



Well, yes; it'd be very strange for any Indo-European languages not to have IE pronouns. What I meant was that 'I' has more of an Anglo-Saxon origin, whereas 'me' comes from Latin -- that's why they're so different. Ultimately, as you observe, they all come from the same source, but that would hardly have been worth mentioning in the context...in fact, perhaps I shouldn't have brought it up 




Outsider said:


> I don't necessarily agree that prescription originates in the written language. Were you never corrected by your parents when you were learning to speak?



I doubt it. You never met my parents :-D



Outsider said:


> But, even assuming that the kind of prescription we're talking about here originates in written grammars, that does not mean it couldn't have affected speech. The moment most people started to go to school, and to learn to write, it became possible for prescritive writers, or teachers, to influence them. I think this may be what has happened in this case:
> 
> Stage 1: everyone says "between you and me".
> Stage 2: at school, teacher says it's wrong to say "you and me" when this is a subject, but students only get the part about it being wrong to say "you and me".
> Stage 3: many people change to saying, or at least writing, "you and I" in all circumstances, even after a preposition.



I don't dispute that this has probably happened many times over. What I dispute is that Stage 1 ever happened.



Outsider said:


> I disagree that what goes for one language should go for another. There is no logical criterium by which you can decide which case should follow the preposition "between/entre". Each language comes up with its own solution, and no solution is objectively better than the others. It's a matter of convention.
> English has pragmatically decided that _all prepositions shall be followed by the objective case, period_. Spanish makes a more subtle distinction between prepositions which equate nouns, and prepositions with an "uneven" meaning. They are both right; they have just interpreted an ambivalent situation in different ways.



I do understand what you're getting at, but you're oversimplifying: what do you mean, for example, by "English (has pragmatically decided)"? How can a language decide anything? Only its speakers can do that, and they hardly ever agree on everything, especially in a language as geographically and socially diverse as English. And even then, the 'period' isn't true: what about "You're giving it to who?" or "I'll go with whoever I can"?


----------



## Outsider

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> I do understand what you're getting at, but you're oversimplifying: what do you mean, for example, by "English (has pragmatically decided)"? How can a language decide anything? Only its speakers can do that, and they hardly ever agree on everything, especially in a language as geographically and socially diverse as English.


Yes, of course, that's what I meant. 



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> And even then, the 'period' isn't true: what about "You're giving it to who?" or "I'll go with whoever I can"?


That's because English speakers have been abandoning "whom" and "whomever" in favour of "who" and "whoever", respectively. Many speakers now interpret "who" and "whoever" as objective case pronouns (as well as subjective case).


----------



## gaer

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Having said that though: usage must always predate prescription by definition, because usage originates in spoken language and prescription in the written language -- and (a few esoteric situations apart) spoken always comes before written historically.


But there are times when two "usages" are both used and accepted, then a prescription is made by someone with a following. Other grammarians pick up the cause, and years (or centuries) later usage has become affected by prescriptions.

To me this is a nasty "trickle-down effect" caused by people accepting the opinions of people blindly often with absolutely no evidence to back up the original opinions.

I suppose something has to be used in order to be prescribed, but with so many things to pick from, it can certainly become incredibly complicated.

Gaer


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

gaer said:


> But there are times when two "usages" are both used and accepted, then a prescription is made by someone with a following. Other grammarians pick up the cause, and years (or centuries) later usage has become affected by prescriptions.
> 
> To me this is a nasty "trickle-down effect" caused by people accepting the opinions of people blindly often with absolutely no evidence to back up the original opinions.
> 
> I suppose something has to be used in order to be prescribed, but with so many things to pick from, it can certainly become incredibly complicated.
> 
> Gaer



You're right, of course: the situation is vastly more complex than a few glib paragraphs or rules of thumb can do justice to. That's language for you :-/

But just to return to 'between you and I/me' one last (yeah, sure) time, there's a common fallacy anyway behind the kind of thinking that insists on 'between you and me' on syntactic grounds. Accepting that 'between' calls for the object/accusative case of a following pronoun, it simply needn't follow that 'between' has any grammatical jurisdiction over the second pronoun in a phrase like 'between x and y'. Why should it? Case is already marked by the first pronoun. If you want to argue that every word inside a phrase joined by a conjunction like 'and' has to have the same grammatical marking, then surely a phrase like 'Fred and I' should take a singular verb, because both 'Fred' and 'I' are singular. But it doesn't. Why should case agreement in conjoined phrases be any different from number agreement? Gramatically speaking, there's no reason why the second element in 'between x and y' shouldn't be marked differently to the first. 

Unfortunately I can't give an example of a language where such a feature is standard usage, but I can give a loosely similar example: in Welsh, only the first element of a conjoined (x and y) phrase is grammatically marked by the preposition, the other remaining in the subject case: 'am fachgen a merch', 'about a boy and a girl', where 'am' mutates 'bachgen' to 'fachgen' but not 'merch' to 'ferch', because the it's 'blocked' by intervening words.


----------

