# I'm not used to...



## Artrella

Hi! 

I have a little doubt...is this sentence right? Any other possibility of making it less formal (if it is formal).


_I am not used to your playing jokes on me._


Thx


----------



## smorodina

Artrella said:
			
		

> _I am not used to your playing jokes on me._


 
hi, Artella. imho, the sentence is correct. 
i suppose you could hear sometimes _I am not used to you playing jokes on me, _
but technically it should be "your playing". 

see what the natives have to say


----------



## mnzrob

I would definitely say "I'm not used to YOU playing jokes on me", but I think smorodina is right, and "your" would be the correct way to say it. But most people (in the US...or in Chicago, at least) say "you".


----------



## te gato

Artrella said:
			
		

> Hi!
> 
> I have a little doubt...is this sentence right? Any other possibility of making it less formal (if it is formal).
> 
> 
> _I am not used to your playing jokes on me._
> 
> 
> Thx


Hi Art;
You could change it to...
I'm not used to you playing jokes on me...
te gato


----------



## Crystal84

We all say it "I am not used to YOU playing jokes on me"


----------



## lsp

Art, regardless of rules, we say both. Depends on the sound and if there's a list. ("I'm not used to your tone of voice or your playing jokes on me," is what I mean by that)


----------



## Nick

I find _"I'm not used to your" + present participle_ odd.

As to the comment about a list: We would say "I'm not used to your tone of voice or your jokes".


----------



## jacinta

It is odd but it is correct English.  We have made it incorrect by not using it.  We're not used to hearing it.


----------



## Nsonia

Please Foreros,
What do you mean by "playing jokes on me"? Is it "teasing me"?
Nsonia


----------



## gaer

Artrella said:
			
		

> Hi!
> 
> I have a little doubt...is this sentence right? Any other possibility of making it less formal (if it is formal).
> 
> 
> _I am not used to your playing jokes on me._
> 
> 
> Thx


It sounds fine to me.

But this sounds better, to me:

"I am not used to *you* playing jokes on me."

Frankly, I don't know what the difference is there. 

There is probably a rule I don't know, and in this case I may be giving you totally wrong info…


----------



## gaer

jacinta said:
			
		

> It is odd but it is correct English. We have made it incorrect by not using it. We're not used to hearing it.


I'm not doubting you, but I'm curious what the rule is!


----------



## te gato

Nsonia said:
			
		

> Please Foreros,
> What do you mean by "playing jokes on me"? Is it "teasing me"?
> Nsonia


Hello Nsonia;
Yes it would be teasing, playing a trick on someone...
te gato


----------



## edward_mao

smorodina said:
			
		

> hi, Artella. imho, the sentence is correct.
> i suppose you could hear sometimes _I am not used to you playing jokes on me, _
> but technically it should be "your playing".
> 
> see what the natives have to say


 
So did my teachers teach me


----------



## Lems

jacinta said:
			
		

> It is odd but it is correct English.  We have made it incorrect by not using it.  We're not used to hearing it.


I have listened and read that structure several times but my teacher's hat does not allow me to judge its correctness.  

Lems
___________________________________________
In the future, computers won’t weight over 1.5 ton.
_Popular Mechanics, foreseeing the evolution of the technology, 1949._


----------



## sperdomo

Hi Art, 

Your original sentence already sounds informal and relaxed. I can't think of any way to make it more casual. You could make it more formal though... I am not accustomed to your playing jokes on me. 

be well
susan



I


----------



## Artrella

sperdomo said:
			
		

> Hi Art,
> Your original sentence already sounds informal and relaxed. I can't think of any way to make it more casual. You could make it more formal though... I am not accustomed to your playing jokes on me.
> be well
> susan
> I



I think the use of "possessive pronouns" in sentences like mine, is FORMAL at least I was taught that when we saw the "suggest patterns".  But I cannot find any examples with used to + personal pronoun or possessive pronouns  

Eg, He suggested my going to see a doctor
     He suggested me to go and see a doctor (Wrong)
     He suggested I go and see a doctor (??)

This is strange because I always find examples with "used to" where appear
only "I am used to going/ to doing" but never with a person following that structure!

Thx, Susan!


----------



## sperdomo

Art

I didn't include the "you" as an option for a less formal version, because I suspect it is grammatically inncorect. I say suspect because I can't find the exact page in my book which confirms the rule that the possessive is needed before the gerund. But, I admit that it is true that grammatical errors are less formal!  

You would like the text-book we are using this semester. It goes over the finer points of grammar in great detail and goes beyond correct/incorrect... 854 pages of discussion and bed-time rreading ! 

The Grammar Book, an ESL/EFL Teacher's Course. By Marianne Celce-Murcia and Diane Larsen Freeman.


----------



## jacinta

gaer said:
			
		

> I'm not doubting you, but I'm curious what the rule is!




This was actually discussed in a thread a while ago and right now I have no idea where it is.  But I'll repeat it since you ask.  I know that it sounds so strange we don't recognize the rule anymore.  I am only stating this, I don't advocate it  

In this sentence, "I'm not used to your playing jokes on me", the gerund form is a *noun* so the pronoun must show possesion.  Hence, the use of "your".

I won't put up with your whining anymore.
His being late doesn't make any difference.
I think your taking piano lessons is a great idea.

For better or worse, there you have it.  I was actually taught this in school once upon a time.


----------



## Artrella

> In this sentence, "I'm not used to your playing jokes on me", the gerund form is a *noun* so the pronoun must show possesion.  Hence, the use of "your".




Jacinta, great explanation! Now I've learnt why the use of the_ possessive pronoun._
Thx


----------



## Artrella

sperdomo said:
			
		

> Art
> 
> I didn't include the "you" as an option for a less formal version, because I suspect it is grammatically inncorect. I say suspect because I can't find the exact page in my book which confirms the rule that the possessive is needed before the gerund. But, I admit that it is true that grammatical errors are less formal!
> 
> You would like the text-book we are using this semester. It goes over the finer points of grammar in great detail and goes beyond correct/incorrect... 854 pages of discussion and bed-time rreading !
> 
> The Grammar Book, an ESL/EFL Teacher's Course. By Marianne Celce-Murcia and Diane Larsen Freeman.




Thx Susan... I'll try to find that book!! I'm a Grammar freak!!!


----------



## Wordsmyth

Jacinta  has provided the rule 


			
				jacinta said:
			
		

> [...] "I'm not used to your playing jokes on me", the gerund form is a *noun* so the pronoun must show possession.  Hence, the use of "your".


... It helps to understand that a gerund is a noun if you consider that it can be replaced by "the ... of":

"I hate a dog barking" should be "I hate a dog's barking"; it can also be "I hate the barking of a dog" -- so "barking' is obviously a noun.  

But to gain respect, rules need to be useful, and this one is :

Take "I hate your being sarcastic". If you say "I hate you being sarcastic", only one small comma (or tiny pause, when speaking) could produce the kind of miscommunication that causes wars (or divorces!):

"I hate you, being sarcastic" = I hate you permanently because you are by nature sarcastic.
"I hate your being sarcastic" = I hate it when you are sarcastic.


Again Jacinta hits the nail on the head:


			
				jacinta said:
			
		

> [...]  We have made it incorrect by not using it.  We're not used to hearing it.


 ... so let's try not to lose these subtleties of language that help communication (and avoid wars & divorces!)


As te gato  says


			
				te gato said:
			
		

> Hi Art;
> You could change it to...
> I'm not used to you playing jokes on me...
> te gato


... well, you could, and in this context there's no risk of misunderstanding. 
But my advice, *Art*, to help preserve useful grammar, is:
Stay with your original _"I am not used to your playing jokes on me"_.  

W


----------



## Artrella

Wordsmyth said:
			
		

> But my advice, *Art*, to help preserve useful grammar, is:
> Stay with your original _"I am not used to your playing jokes on me"_.
> 
> W




Yes W! That's why I was asking for a "less formal" expression, because I KNOW that "your" is grammatically correct.  So I'd rather be formal than ungrammatical.  But then people say you sound "posh".  In order to play on the safe side, I'll stick to the use of "your" .  Thank you for your crystal clear explanation


----------



## Wordsmyth

Artrella said:
			
		

> Yes W! That's why I was asking for a "less formal" expression, because I KNOW that "your" is grammatically correct.  So I'd rather be formal than ungrammatical.  But then people say you sound "posh".  In order to play on the safe side, I'll stick to the use of "your" .  Thank you for your crystal clear explanation


*Art*, Sorry if my explanation was "teaching my grandmother to suck eggs" (you know that one?  ). Actually most of my last post was for the people who were taking the "I guess it's a rule but does it matter?" approach.

As Susan said, your original sentence already sounds informal and relaxed, but I suppose you could 'popularise' it a bit more : 
_"You don't usually play jokes on me. I'm not used to it."_
Not as neat as your original, but it avoids the "your" issue.

And if people say you sound 'posh', don't be put down by that : it's often to cover their own shortcomings. If we give in to that, we'll eventually have a prehistoric language, communicating in words of one syllable; or (cos that sounded posh) "we'll end up wiv just short words, like wot them cave blokes did"  

Hasta luego
W


----------



## te gato

Wordsmyth;

I concur...I am also a firm believer in keeping the English language as 'formal' as possible....I never stated that I was not...The art of using the English language properly is dying out, and I fear will continue to do so..

The original question of Art's was how to change the sentence she provided..to be 'less' formal, not that I perceived it to be formal in the first place...Therefore I gave her the less formal rendition...in my opinion...

te gato


----------



## Artrella

Wordsmyth said:
			
		

> *Art*, Sorry if my explanation was "teaching my grandmother to suck eggs" (you know that one?  ). Actually most of my last post was for the people who were taking the "I guess it's a rule but does it matter?" approach.
> 
> As Susan said, your original sentence already sounds informal and relaxed, but I suppose you could 'popularise' it a bit more :
> _"You don't usually play jokes on me. I'm not used to it."_
> Not as neat as your original, but it avoids the "your" issue.
> 
> And if people say you sound 'posh', don't be put down by that : it's often to cover their own shortcomings. If we give in to that, we'll eventually have a prehistoric language, communicating in words of one syllable; or (cos that sounded posh) "we'll end up wiv just short words, like wot them cave blokes did"
> 
> Hasta luego
> W





You know? I always learn something new to me from your posts, so go on "teaching _me_ how to suck eggs",  there is always something new to learn...ok??
Your contributions are always welcomed and are always helpful!!! Thank you very much W


----------



## gaer

Artrella said:
			
		

> Yes W! That's why I was asking for a "less formal" expression, because I KNOW that "your" is grammatically correct. So I'd rather be formal than ungrammatical. But then people say you sound "posh". In order to play on the safe side, I'll stick to the use of "your" . Thank you for your crystal clear explanation


 
There is nothing "posh sounding " about saying this to me:

"I am not used to your playing jokes on me".

As I said before, I truly did not know which was correct, and I'm very interesting to learn a new rule. As I've pointed out before, you will often find out that the "wrong" way is so common, we begin to accept as more correct than the right way. 

Gaer


----------



## gaer

jacinta said:
			
		

> This was actually discussed in a thread a while ago and right now I have no idea where it is. But I'll repeat it since you ask. I know that it sounds so strange we don't recognize the rule anymore. I am only stating this, I don't advocate it
> 
> In this sentence, "I'm not used to your playing jokes on me", the gerund form is a *noun* so the pronoun must show possesion. Hence, the use of "your".
> 
> I won't put up with your whining anymore.
> His being late doesn't make any difference.
> I think your taking piano lessons is a great idea.
> 
> For better or worse, there you have it. I was actually taught this in school once upon a time.


Well, the sentences you just wrote look very natural to me. It seems as though we need to put a possessive pronoun before a gerund. It's embarrassing, but I often know more rules about other languages than my own. 

I hope you did not mind MY ASKING the question. 

Gaer


----------



## Wordsmyth

te gato said:
			
		

> Wordsmyth;
> 
> I concur...I am also a firm believer in keeping the English language as 'formal' as possible....I never stated that I was not...The art of using the English language properly is dying out, and I fear will continue to do so..
> 
> The original question of Art's was how to change the sentence she provided..to be 'less' formal, not that I perceived it to be formal in the first place...Therefore I gave her the less formal rendition...in my opinion...
> 
> te gato


Hi te gato,

I guess we're pretty much on common ground. Just one point, though: I'm also a firm believer in informal language -- it often adds colour, charm, sometimes even better understanding. Formal and informal each has its place.

I'm not a great supporter of "rules for rules' sake". But I do strongly support 'correct' usage when it helps communication and avoids ambiguity -- and that's where I share your concern that we might be losing 'proper' use of language (English or other). 

Cheers

W


----------



## te gato

Wordsmyth said:
			
		

> Hi te gato,
> 
> I guess we're pretty much on common ground. Just one point, though: I'm also a firm believer in informal language -- it often adds colour, charm, sometimes even better understanding. Formal and informal each has its place.
> 
> I'm not a great supporter of "rules for rules' sake". But I do strongly support 'correct' usage when it helps communication and avoids ambiguity -- and that's where I share your concern that we might be losing 'proper' use of language (English or other).
> 
> Cheers
> 
> W


Good Morning Wordsmyth;
At least it is here.. 
Common ground..yes I agree...So if you believe in the  Formal and Informal..
basically you believe in the English language....
What rules? You are speaking to someone from Alberta that has her own language..  at times I can speak proper....
It is a scary thought...loosing the "proper" usage of a language...
Thank you for responding...
te gato


----------



## jacinta

gaer said:
			
		

> I hope you did not mind MY ASKING the question.
> 
> Gaer



Now, why would I mind?  I didn't mind at all  .


----------



## gaer

jacinta said:
			
		

> Now, why would I mind? I didn't mind at all  .


Then you also would not mind my mentioning the fact that I learned something new here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Gaer


----------



## jacinta

gaer said:
			
		

> Then you also would not mind my mentioning the fact that I learned something new here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gaer



Boy, am I thick.  I didn't even notice *YOUR USING * capital letters to prove your new-found knowledge   See?  It doesn't look strange to me at all.  I took it in stride.


----------



## gaer

jacinta said:
			
		

> Boy, am I thick. I didn't even notice *YOUR USING *capital letters to prove your new-found knowledge   See? It doesn't look strange to me at all. I took it in stride.


It doesn't seem strange to me at all to read or write such phrases. I thought of some examples where using "you" in place "your" might assume a missing preposition, but I can't think of an example for the life me right now!

Hmm. <thinking, can you smell the smoke…>

Can NOT think of it now! <drat>

Gaer


----------



## mjscott

Just as a thought:
 When you say,

_I'm tired of you eating in bed._
_I'm tired of your eating in bed._

I think both are correct--
In one, (when you use _you_) you are tired of the person eating in bed.
In the other, (when you use _your_) you are tired of the act of the person eating in bed.

Although both _seem_ to say the similar things, as said by Wordsmyth, I think it's best to ask whether the reason for your tiredness is a person (because of his actions) or whether the reason for your tiredness is an action (because of a person). As Wordsmyth said, the difference can light candles, launch ships and cause wars!

I am not _nearly_ as close to my references as you are, Artrella--but I think both are correct.


----------



## te gato

Hi all;
I agree with mjscott;
but then I do that a lot..mmmmm
To me they also both sound ok..

te gato


----------



## gaer

mjscott said:
			
		

> Just as a thought:
> When you say,
> 
> _I'm tired of you eating in bed._
> _I'm tired of your eating in bed._
> 
> I think both are correct--
> In one, (when you use _you_) you are tired of the person eating in bed.
> In the other, (when you use _your_) you are tired of the act of the person eating in bed.
> 
> Although both _seem_ to say the similar things, as said by Wordsmyth, I think it's best to ask whether the reason for your tiredness is a person (because of his actions) or whether the reason for your tiredness is an action (because of a person). As Wordsmyth said, the difference can light candles, launch ships and cause wars!
> 
> I am not _nearly_ as close to my references as you are, Artrella--but I think both are correct.


That's VERY subtle. I don't get a difference in meaning. I just can't feel a difference in the way you seem to be pointing, but I WOULD tend to use "you", I think, if I got angry. Man, this is HARD. As always, language can never be completely understood logically. 

Perhaps there is a carry-over from sentences such as:

I'm sick of you.

That stands on its own. So maybe this is why "I'm sick of you complaining all the time" seems to have more anger behind it and this sounds weird to me:

"I'm sick of your complaining all the time."

That may be correct grammatically, but for me it doesn't carry the same "emotional baggage". For me, this is just as strange as saying: "It is I".

Is that what you were getting at? 

Gaer


----------



## ziller

Oddly enough, I thought I'd find something else going on in this thread.  While it is correct colloquial English, my early training taught me  that the whole "used to" construction is less than correct, and one should use "accustomed to", or something else in that vein.


----------



## Artrella

ziller said:
			
		

> Oddly enough, I thought I'd find something else going on in this thread.  While it is correct colloquial English, my early training taught me  that the whole "used to" construction is less than correct, and one should use "accustomed to", or something else in that vein.





What did you think you'd find in this thread?  Please tell us, so we can learn from you about the use of "used to" and "accustomed to".  Would you like to explain what you know, please Ziller?
Thank you.


----------



## jacinta

"Used" is listed in the American Heritage dictionary as an adjective that means accustomed to.  It is pronounced "yoost".  There is no mention of it being slang or informal.  Just a regular word.  I've never heard that it is improper.


----------



## gaer

ziller said:
			
		

> Oddly enough, I thought I'd find something else going on in this thread. While it is correct colloquial English, my early training taught me that the whole "used to" construction is less than correct, and one should use "accustomed to", or something else in that vein.


The thread seems to have drifted.

I would say that what you were taught is very conservative, at the least. The use of "used to" seems to have been around since the 1600s, or perhaps earlier.

But I have always found "used to", in any sense, very strange. I use it, but when I think about it, it never seems logical.

Also, there are two completely different meaning, since "used to" is also used for "at one time"

I used to eat less. At one time/in the past I ate less. I would understand why people learning English would have great trouble with this construction.

G


----------



## Artrella

gaer said:
			
		

> The thread seems to have drifted.
> 
> I would say that what you were taught is very conservative, at the least. The use of "used to" seems to have been around since the 1600s, or perhaps earlier.
> 
> But I have always found "used to", in any sense, very strange. I use it, but when I think about it, it never seems logical.
> 
> Also, there are two completely different meaning, since "used to" is also used for "at one time"
> 
> I used to eat less. At one time/in the past I ate less. I would understand why people learning English would have great trouble with this construction.
> 
> G





Yes, Gaer: two different things.  So what word do you use to mean that NOW you are "accustomed" or you have the "habit" of doing sth regularly, NOW???

I'm accustomed to reading the newspaper in the mornings.

I'm used to reading the newspaper in the mornings.

What do natives use nowadays, if you don't say "used to"?  In my sentence would you have said "I am not accustomed to your playing jokes on me"?

Thank you


----------



## jacinta

Artrella said:
			
		

> Yes, Gaer: two different things.  So what word do you use to mean that NOW you are "accustomed" or you have the "habit" of doing sth regularly, NOW???
> 
> I'm accustomed to reading the newspaper in the mornings.
> 
> I'm used to reading the newspaper in the mornings.
> 
> What do natives use nowadays, if you don't say "used to"?  In my sentence would you have said "I am not accustomed to your playing jokes on me"?
> 
> Thank you



Hi, Art,

In my world we say "I'm not used to eating breakfast so early in the morning".
We would never say "I'm not accustomed to eating..."  It sounds too formal.

Gaer is pointing out a different usage of "used to".  I used to eat breakfast early," is different that "I am used to eating breakfast early".  The first is a verb form and the second is an adjective.
Do you see that by adding "am" to the second, it changes the meaning?

I know that we are drifting, but it is connected with you original example, so why not.


----------



## gaer

Artrella said:
			
		

> Yes, Gaer: two different things. So what word do you use to mean that NOW you are "accustomed" or you have the "habit" of doing sth regularly, NOW???
> 
> I'm accustomed to reading the newspaper in the mornings.
> 
> I'm used to reading the newspaper in the mornings.
> 
> What do natives use nowadays, if you don't say "used to"? In my sentence would you have said "I am not accustomed to your playing jokes on me"?
> 
> Thank you


 
I would say: 

"I'm used to reading the newspaper in the mornings."
"I am not used to your playing jokes on me"

"Accustomed to" sounds unnecessarily formal and stiff to me. 

Gaer


----------



## gaer

jacinta said:
			
		

> Hi, Art,
> 
> In my world we say "I'm not used to eating breakfast so early in the morning".
> We would never say "I'm not accustomed to eating..." It sounds too formal.
> 
> Gaer is pointing out a different usage of "used to". I used to eat breakfast early," is different that "I am used to eating breakfast early". The first is a verb form and the second is an adjective.
> Do you see that by adding "am" to the second, it changes the meaning?
> 
> I know that we are drifting, but it is connected with you original example, so why not.


I totally agree with you. 

G


----------

