• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

• possessive apostrophes: an increasing number of writers simply leave these out. If one writes, The cars fender was dented (not car’s) or Andy Pettittes slider is the best in the American League (not Pettitte’s), virtually every reader will understand the meaning, though not as quickly as the apostrophe would allow.

• I vs. me, especially in prepositional phrases: This one has to do with what grammarians call the case of pronouns. We use one form of a pronoun when it is in the subject and another when it is the object of a verb or a preposition. For example,

• My mother and I argue about grammar—not My mother and me. We would not say “Me argues about grammar.” I is in the subjective case; me is in the objective case.

• According to my mother and me, grammar matters a lot—not According to my mother and I. We would not say According to I. “According to” is a preposition, so you have to use the objective case, as the pronoun in question is the object of the preposition.

But increasingly, we hear native speakers saying things such as Joe and me are going to get a beer or For Jill and I, voting is an undeniable civic duty, virtually an ethical imperative. In the first example, a speaker might say Joe and me because it sounds “natural,” that is, unpretentious, as unpretentious as having a beer. In the second example, a speaker might say For Jill and I because (and we’re not sure why this is!), the use of “and I” sometimes sounds classier, more high style, and in a sentence where lofty concepts such as civic duty and ethical imperatives occur, you might wish to sound classy. But “I” in “For Jill and I” must be changed to “me,” the objective case, because it is the object of the preposition “For.”

• who versus whom: This is another version of the pronoun problem. Who is subjective case; whom is objective case. For example: I want to know who ate the last slice of pie I left in the refrigerator. Compare that with Ask not for whom the bell tolls—where whom is the object of the preposition for. Yet increasingly, speakers seem to fear working out the grammar necessary to figure out if the who/whom in question is a subject or an object, so they tend either to eliminate whom altogether and just use who for every case, or they assume that whom is classier, as they do “and I,” and they end up misusing whom. Here are examples:

• Who is Derek Jeter going to sign with, now that he has become a free agent? This sentence is grammatically incorrect: we need a Whom to be the object of the preposition with—With whom will Jeter sign?

• I read a book by the cognitive therapist whom is most famous for formulating rational emotive therapy. The loftiness of the topic misleads the writer into using the supposedly classier whom even though grammar tells us the pronoun who is in the subjective case.

Usage as Cultural Marker

You can think of usage in terms of markers—indicators of something. So, for example:

• usage as marker for informal, conversational versus formal style:

And then she goes, “that’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard” versus And then she says, …

And some people disallow contractions as too informal.

• usage as marker for social class:

Where is he at? versus Where is he?

I ain’t going versus I am not going.

• usage as gender marker:

Poetess versus poet, actress versus actor, waitress versus waiter or wait-person

Most people have not heard the word poetess—how long before the same will be said of actress? (The –ess suffix indicating female is now considered sexist by many people because it relegates women to a separate category.)

* * *

Try This 19.1: Discover the Rationale for Usage Choices

Research the following pairs of terms. Locate the usage “rules” that govern them, and if you can, uncover the rationale that informs these rules.

Try and / try to

Shall / will

Disinterested / uninterested

Raise / rise

* * *

WHAT PUNCTUATION MARKS SAY: A QUICK-HIT GUIDE

These little signs really aren’t that hard to use correctly, folks. A few of them will be treated