Originally posted by theblue1:

PS... with verbs of equivalence (is, am, are, etc) a quick and dirty test is to just turn the sentence around. You might be tempted to say "If you were me..." but you'd probably never say "If me were you..." ( Here\'s more info .) [/QB]

Many educated people feel that in saying It is I, Whom do you mean? instead of It's me, Who do you mean? they will be talking like a book, and they justifiably prefer geniality to grammar. But in print, unless it is dialogue, the correct forms are advisable.

Originally posted by theblue1:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by LiveMusic:
[qb](This is similiar to the rather stuffy but correct usage: "It is I." as opposed to the 'easier-on-the-ear' but not actually, technically correct "It is me."

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
A speaker of Old English would hardly know what was being said by people on the streets of London today---& not just because of new words; even the words they used would be enunciated differently & in many cases used differently.

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
The structural rules of one language are often adapted by those learning a new one (like emigrants learning English in NYC) & often then become commonplaces in that tongue as they spread.
...
If you're familiar w/ the Gullah dialects of the SE USA, (which are the roots of what's referred to as "Black English"), you can see exactly what I mean.

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
Here's one that I really dislike: Two very effective & useful terms ("affect" & effect") have virtually vanished in just a couple decades because people have adopted, quite incorrectly, the term "impact" rather than either of those words. Impact is a term for physical contact (impacted tooth, meteor impact, etc.).

Originally posted by Jeff Leites:
Isn't "It" the subject, "is" the verb and "me" the object? Hence, "It is me" would be correct?

Originally posted by geekgurl:
John O, sorry if you think I was trying to "best" anyone here, but that certainly was not my intent. I think the ensuing dialog here pretty much has my point covered (as well as enlightening me on "If … were". Thanks Blue1 and Dan S! See, I’m not above giving credit where credit is due). I was merely stating my case and noting what otherwise would not have been known, which is that I’m basing my claims on at least knowing enough to make a living dealing with grammar. But there’s always more to learn. As the "if … were" dialog shows.

But just to address some other things here:

Quote:

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
A speaker of Old English would hardly know what was being said by people on the streets of London today---& not just because of new words; even the words they used would be enunciated differently & in many cases used differently.

Since you were also an English major, I’m sure you, too, had to suffer through Beowulf as originally written (well, I suffered, particularly because I don’t speak or read German).

Also, I think the difference between linguistics and grammar is beyond a "quibble"; I was thinking of grammar as but one aspect of linguistics as it applies to a specific language (whereas linguistics also goes as broad as encompassing the study of how and why humans at large communicate). That was based on how my studies at school were broken up (we dealt with things other than English grammar in linguistics class, but compared some English grammar to Latin grammar, for example, to illustrate a broader linguistic point). I looked up "grammar" in Webster’s and it seems to confirm this.

Anyway, linguistics fascinates me. I was pretty good at it, too ... analyzing all those phenomes and such ... dang, I actually got an A+ in a linguistics class when most people were feeling lucky to eek out a B-. But, at the time I couldn't see any real application other than teaching linguistics for such a degree, so I didn't pursue it.

Originally posted by geekgurl:
Oh, come on, B-Lips ... that's a bit heavy-handed, isn't it?

Originally posted by geekgurl:
John O, sorry if you think I was trying to "best" anyone here, but that certainly was not my intent.

Naw, just tryin' to head off the "credentials parade" that often is used to support positions. .

Quote:

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
A speaker of Old English would hardly know what was being said by people on the streets of London today---& not just because of new words; even the words they used would be enunciated differently & in many cases used differently.

Since you were also an English major, I’m sure you, too, had to suffer through Beowulf as originally written (well, I suffered, particularly because I don’t speak or read German).
Fascinating!

Also, I think the difference between linguistics and grammar is beyond a "quibble"...I lookred up "grammar" in Webster’s and it seems to confirm this.
My larger points (incomphrehnsibly?) are that rules change. They are often misapplied from one area to another. Authority positions likewise change. Check a dictionary/grammar tome from another time & you'll get a diferent set of rules.
Again verbal language, like it's cousin music, is ever-changing---there is no end-all set of constants---& the only real point is communication. Everything else is dressing.

Quote:

Originally posted by John O. Lennon:
The structural rules of one language are often adapted by those learning a new one (like emigrants learning English in NYC) & often then become commonplaces in that tongue as they spread.
...
If you're familiar w/ the Gullah dialects of the SE USA, (which are the roots of what's referred to as "Black English"), you can see exactly what I mean.

If I understand your point correctly ... are these structural changes considered grammatically correct English? As already said sometimes they come to be considered so. I did find this on the Web though: A foolproof source for facts!!
If one looks for an authority, at least be selective.

Originally posted by Dan South:


English speakers and writers are sloppy with their application of the subjunctive. They say abominally horrible things such as -

- "I wish that I WAS rich."

- "If Kobe was Jordan, the Lakers would have won."

- "If I was you, I'd find a new job.

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

I wish that English speakers were more aware of the subjunctive mood.