Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 August 15

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 15

What is the correct wording? Me or I?

What is the correct wording? And why? Sentence "A": I would like you (and me) to draft a new contract for the client. Sentence "B": I would like you (and I) to draft a new contract for the client. I can't determine which is correct, because they both sound good and they both sound bad. It seems like "me" could be correct, because "me" is a direct object of the verb "like". (I think?) But, it also seems like "I" could be correct, because the sentence is basically saying "I would like for it to be the case that you and I draft a new contract" (in which case, the "you and I" phrase seems like the subject of the clause ("we will draft a new contract"). (I think?) Help! Two additional comments: (1) I understand that these sentence can be re-phrased to avoid this issue. But, I am not interested in re-phrasing. I am curious about the correct wording in this particular situation. And: (2) If the parentheses are causing some type of problem here – which I do not think they are – then erase the parentheses and use the same exact sentences without the parentheses. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:35, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Replace "you and me" with us, and "you and I" with "we", and see how it sounds.

In this case:

(A) I would like you (and me) us to draft a new contract for the client.

(B) I would like you (and I) we to draft a new contract for the client.

As you can see, (A) is grammatically correct. The reason for this is that it the clearest and most natural way to say it.

That is, of course, if your definition of "grammatically correct" is "the clearest and most natural way to say it". If your definition of "grammatically correct" is "what it says is correct in grammar textbooks", YMMV, etc.

--Shirt58 (talk) 05:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

A is correct because "me" is an object pronoun while "I" is a subject pronoun. In this sentence, the first "I" is the subject, the verb phrase "would like" is the predicate, "you and me" is the object, while everything following is an infinitive clause, a type of modifiying phrase. Complex infinitive clauses may confuse the sentence, if you use a grammatical analogue which does not have such length, such as "I would like you and I to go" or "I would like you and me to go" it is clear that the second of those is the better sentence, because the core of the thought is "I would like (something). Since the (something) is an object of the sentence, you need to use the object form of the pronouns (in this case, me). Unfortunately, English is horribly deficient in its second person pronouns, which is probably the source of some of the confusion. Modern English is limited to using "You" for all sorts of second person pronouns (plural and singular, subject and object). Older varieties of English had a more robust set of pronouns (You, ye, thee, thou, etc.) which would have made the grammar clearer. Alas, that's English for you. --Jayron32 06:12, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. OK. It's starting to make sense. I went back and re-read my original question above. It made me think of a second question. Let's examine this sentence: "I would like for it to be the case that you and I draft a new contract." In that sentence, the phrase "you and I" is correct, yes? It would not be "you and me" in that example. Correct? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:58, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, because the phrase "You and I draft a new contract" works as a standalone sentence. The verb "draft" is not in infinitive form, but rather conjugated as an active verb, and as such, "you and I" is the subject of the sentence. Compare to "It would be best for you and me to draft a new contract". In that case, the verb form "to draft" is infinitive, so "you and [I/me] is not the subject, but rather the object of "It would be best for...", and so "me" works there. The clue that usually helps me remember is to look for the verb following the pronouns. If it's an infinitive verb (to [whatever]), then use the object pronoun "me". If it's an active verb (no "to..." bit) then use the subject pronoun "I". --Jayron32 07:05, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Why not just say "I would like us to draft a new contract"? It's doubleplus-grammatically correct*, because not only is it the clearest and most natural way to say it, it is also the simplest way to say it. (* According to my lunatic-left of descriptivism definition, that is. I'm heading towards 1 000 articles now, written free of unnecessary fetters like prescriptive style and grammar.) --Shirt58 (talk) 09:21, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

That's a good question. And Jayron32's answer below is good, also. The actual reason is this. I was telling the other person that I wanted him to draft a new contract. After I had typed that, I realized that maybe he was not aware that I also wanted to be a part of that effort. In other words, the effort (of drafting a new contract) was to be a collaborative effort with both of us (him and me). If I just stated "I want you to draft the new contract", I was afraid that he would get the wrong perception/impression that he was doing the job alone and that I myself was not going to be involved in the project, alongside him. All of this came as a quick after-thought, as I was typing. So, I quickly threw in the "and me" in parentheses, assuming that it cleared things up. In other words, the project was a two-person job (him and me), and not a one-person job (just him). After I typed it and later re-read it, the wording seemed odd and prompted me to post my question here. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The problem with us/we in English is that (as another one of English's deficiencies) the pronoun has different meanings. It can mean "only yourself and myself", or it can me "Myself and someone else" or it can mean "Myself and yourself and other people". Other languages have multiple words for each of those senses, a linguistic concept known as Clusivity; in English we need to use the convoluted terms "Inclusive we" and "Exclusive we" to highlight those concept. English has only the one word meaning all of these senses; if you want to specific that only I and you are doing an action, and intentionally do not want to include any third parties in your expression, we/us is inadequate, so you have to say "You and I" or "You and me". --Jayron32 16:29, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

There's a lot of technical-speak in the responses to both questions. Here's the quick and dirty solution. Leave out the 'you', and the correct form, 'I' or 'me' will immediately become apparent. For example, "I would like you (and I) to draft a new contract for the client." So, leaving out the 'you' results in "I would like I to draft a new contract..." Now, does that sound right? Akld guy (talk) 12:01, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

There is a lot of "technical" speak in the replies. But, that is because I asked "why". I did not just want the correct answer, but also the reason for the correct answer. Hence, the technical speak. Which I found helpful. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jayron32, that may be a deficiency of English, but that particular "deficiency" is shared by a great many languages. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

True, but it does explain why we need to use the phrasing "You and I" or "you and me" sometimes. --Jayron32 21:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Joseph A. Spadaro. Above, you are told: As you can see, (A) is grammatically correct. The reason for this is that it the clearest and most natural way to say it.

Uh, no. Let's keep things simple for a moment by avoiding coordination (or "conjunction" as old-fashioned sources term it). In "I would like us/*we to draft a new contract for the client", "we" is not incorrect because it's unclear or unnatural; it's unnatural because it's ungrammatical. "Us" is grammatical, and it's therefore natural.

Right, now for coordination (simply, linking via "and", "or" or "but"). Coordination is well known for doing odd things to case assignment. Few native speakers, if any, doubt that "Let's keep this between us" is grammatical. Few, if any, say *"Let's keep this between we". But we do hear ^%"Let's keep this between you and I" from a lot of native speakers. What's going on here? The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (recommended!) devotes most of p.463 to this. It does not purport to give a simple answer, saying that hypercorrection is very likely to be a factor but does not explain everything. It does point out that the first person singular is anomalous: tweaking your example for person, "I would like you and her/^???she to draft a new contract for the client" would present a simpler choice.

And so, back to your example. "I would like you and me to draft a new contract for the client": unquestionably grammatical. (Idiomaticity is a different matter. In most situations one could say something that might well sound more natural, e.g. "Let's draft a new contract for the client".) ^%"I would like you and I to draft a new contract for the client": grammatical for a significant percentage of native speakers of English, ungrammatical for a significant percentage of ditto. (I'm among the latter, as it happens.)

Hungry for more? There's this (PDF), this (PDF; yes, only an honors thesis, but one that Arnold Zwicky believes is worth net publication); and also, to show that this kind of oddity is not specific to English, this (PDF) on Spanish. -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Very thorough reply. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad if I've been of help. Meanwhile, I notice sloppiness in what I wrote: "'Us' is grammatical, and it's therefore natural." No! Being grammatical is a necessary condition for sounding natural (other perhaps than in some freak constructions), but it's not a sufficient condition. ("You and I and she would like you and me and her to draft a new contract and a new memorandum of understanding and a new lunch menu and a new dinner menu for this hamster" is grammatical but nevertheless bizarre.) Incidentally, while The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language may give you good value, it is large (over 1800 pages) and expensive. I highly recommend the compact and affordable introductory version, Huddleston and Pullum's A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar. -- Hoary (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

As Akld guy hinted above, the trick to all I/me confusion is to eliminate everyone but yourself from the sentence.

• They asked Bob and I to buy tickets.
• They asked Bob and me to buy tickets.
• They asked Bob and I to buy tickets.
• They asked Bob and me to buy tickets.

The second choice clearly sounds correct, so you would use "me" in this sentence.

It works every time, and you don't need to understand any fancy grammatical concepts or jargon. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Much of the above is wrong. "Me and Bob bought tickets" is grammatical English, though "me bought tickets" isn't. The only time you need to say "I and ..." or "... and I" is when trying to impress linguistically ignorant people, and in that case you may as well use it in object position too because they'll probably expect that. Otherwise, use the accusatives (me, us, him) when in doubt, because that seems to be the rule most native speakers follow.

Thomas Grano's thesis (which Hoary linked above) has a bunch of examples that break the prescriptive rules, like "They got there before me" (despite "They got there before I did"), "Silly me forgot to bring a jacket", and "All debts are cleerd betweene you and I" (Shakespeare, 1596). -- BenRG (talk) 06:06, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Wow, that just muddied the waters. Excellent counter-examples. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Note this thread has been continued (Bumped) under the same title on August 22. Akld guy (talk) 00:08, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

By default

There is the phrase: "By default, appointment will be temporary, lasting any time up to a year." What does by default mean? Does it really mean anything? Is there another way to put it more clearly? Does the phrase allow any permanent appointments to be made? --Pxos (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

"By default" means "unless otherwise agreed". 5.150.92.20 (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

5.150.92.20 (talk) is one of several London area IP sockpuppets of banned User:Vote (X) for Change

Or, more generally, it means "unless something else is done". This term is often used in computer science, meaning the value a variable will have unless otherwise specified. For example, a US web site might ask customers which country they are from, and default to the US, meaning they don't have to select the US, it's already pre-selected. — StuRat — continues after insertion below

Yes, that's exactly how it would be used in software. But strangely, this doesn't work here, since the default here is not a specific predecided value, as in "By default, appointment will be two months." You can't really agree on an assignment to be limited unless you agree on the limit. By leaving the duration vague, there is no value to default to. Therefore, I think it's just a misuse of the term "default". Likewise, 5.150.92.20's and User:StuRats good translations "unless otherwise agreed / something else is done" become as meaningless as the German proverb "When the rooster crows on the dung heap, the weather will change, or it will stay the way it is". — Sebastian 15:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Also note the seemingly unrelated use of the word in economics, where "default" means you fail to pay your bills at the agreed upon time. I suspect there was a relationship, though, in that the "default behavior", if nothing was done (that is, if the bills were not paid), was once seizure of assets. (Bankruptcy law somewhat complicated matters, though.)

In your example, they might mean that it can be renewed after a year, in which case saying that explicitly would be clearer. StuRat (talk) 14:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

See definition 5 here. --Jayron32 16:23, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

5a: "a selection made usually automatically or without active consideration due to lack of a viable alternative". Is there anyone who thinks the phrase in the example is sloppy writing? Is "permanent appointment" a viable alternative? StuRat writes "they might mean that...". So everyone is left guessing because the phrase "by default" creates only confusion and no clarity to the sentence. It could be replaced with "normally", "thus far", or even "without exception", if the latter is true. --Pxos (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

It was clear to me, but I agree that 5.150.92.20's suggestion of "unless otherwise agreed" would have avoided any confusion. Dbfirs 12:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

What the phrase "by default" adds is an aspect of mechanics or process, even though it is often a passive process. That is to say, not only does the default kick in unless otherwise agreed, but also the default actually does kick in unless othewise agreed. Something (the default) actually does happen/change/come into play. Since the OP talks about an "appointment" being made, perhaps this process aspect of "by default" is formally unnecessary here. But if one wants to emphasize the existence of the process, then it is reasonable to include that language here. StevenJ81 (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)