Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Iís Have It (Obama confuses "me" and "I")
New York Times ^ | February 23, 2009 | Patricia T O'Conner and Stewart Kellerman

Posted on 02/24/2009 10:38:52 AM PST by reaganaut1

When President Obama speaks before Congress and the nation tonight, he will be facing some of his toughest critics.

Grammar junkies.

Since his election, the president has been roundly criticized by bloggers for using “I” instead of “me” in phrases like “a very personal decision for Michelle and I” or “the main disagreement with John and I” or “graciously invited Michelle and I.”

The rule here, according to conventional wisdom, is that we use “I” as a subject and “me” as an object, whether the pronoun appears by itself or in a twosome. Thus every “I” in those quotes ought to be a “me.”

So should the president go stand in a corner of the Oval Office (if he can find one) and contemplate the error of his ways? Not so fast.

For centuries, it was perfectly acceptable to use either “I” or “me” as the object of a verb or preposition, especially after “and.” Literature is full of examples. Here’s Shakespeare, in “The Merchant of Venice”: “All debts are cleared between you and I.” And here’s Lord Byron, complaining to his half-sister about the English town of Southwell, “which, between you and I, I wish was swallowed up by an earthquake, provided my eloquent mother was not in it.”

It wasn’t until the mid-1800s that language mavens began kvetching about “I” and “me.” The first kvetch cited in Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage came from a commencement address in 1846. In 1869, Richard Meade Bache included it in his book “Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech.”

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 111th; bho44; bhospeech; dunce; gaffemachine; grammar; kantspel; macacamoment; obama; obamagaffes; potatoe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: reaganaut1

Obama’s just using a high class form of ebonics....


41 posted on 02/24/2009 11:03:16 AM PST by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holicheese

Gesundheit


42 posted on 02/24/2009 11:03:39 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Obama - what you get when you mix Affirmative Action with the Peter Principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Rippin
"I ain’t falling for this. I don’t care about his grammar, I care about his Marxism. "

Didn't his Grammar just die recently?

43 posted on 02/24/2009 11:04:48 AM PST by TommyDale (I) (Never forget the Republicans who voted for illegal immigrant amnesty in 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: JennysCool

I, three.


44 posted on 02/24/2009 11:08:51 AM PST by Disciplinemisanthropy (III III IV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
It may escape the erudition of the NY Times but when I object to a statement such as "the program to charge your grandchildren's grandchildren for the egoistical excesses of the Democratic party has been approved by Pelosi, Reid, and I" it isn't because of the grammar.
45 posted on 02/24/2009 11:12:38 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud American in Canada

And using ‘impact’ as a transitive verb.


46 posted on 02/24/2009 11:13:59 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Interesting Times

You clearly aren’t hooked on Obamics.


47 posted on 02/24/2009 11:20:51 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Chicago is so corrupt... an autopsy can list "'cause he wouldn't listen" - Lenny Bruce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

This is fair game when dealing with a malignant narcissist whom the MSM has labeled “brilliant”.


48 posted on 02/24/2009 11:24:39 AM PST by Dionysius (Jingoism is no vice in these troubled times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
For centuries, it was perfectly acceptable to use either “I” or “me” as the object of a verb or preposition,

Democrats and the lefties are always bitching about how we have to live in the 21st Century and the Constitution is a "living document" that should evolve.

Now they defend the idiotONE's speech patterns based on centuries old grammar rules?

Fine, the right will back off on what an idiot Obama is when speaking english when the left starts understanding and interpreting the Constitution according to 1600's patterned English. Let's start with a couple of phrases

"shall not be infringed" and "well regulated" ....

49 posted on 02/24/2009 11:27:30 AM PST by Centurion2000 (01-20-2009 : The end of the PAX AMERICANA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound

Yes, I’m sure he’s thinking of Shakespeare when he makes these gaffes.But that’s OK, as obama himself would say, “It’s not that big of a deal.”


50 posted on 02/24/2009 11:29:00 AM PST by ElayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SonOfDarkSkies
This passes for serious analysis of Obama and his policy at the NY Times. I can't wait for the next ground breaking story the Times runs on the socialist impostor sitting in the White House.
51 posted on 02/24/2009 11:30:28 AM PST by peeps36 ( Al Gore. Is A Big Fat Lying Hypocrite. He Pollutes The Air By Opening His Big Mouth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
The rule here, according to conventional wisdom, is that we use “I” as a subject and “me” as an object, whether the pronoun appears by itself or in a twosome. Thus every “I” in those quotes ought...

According to conventional wisdom???? No, genius, according to the rules of grammar.

52 posted on 02/24/2009 11:32:27 AM PST by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Interesting Times
"Yep. Certainly no double standard here."

Won't be too long before smoking is cool again.

53 posted on 02/24/2009 11:33:29 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer

Me won!

54 posted on 02/24/2009 11:34:53 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: fullchroma
"My husband and I are worried that Obama will ruin you and me."

Methinks you are correct!

55 posted on 02/24/2009 11:35:25 AM PST by bonnieblue4me (You can put lipstick on a donkey (or a dimrat), but it is still an ass!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
When President Obama speaks before Congress and the nation tonight, he will be facing some of his toughest critics. Grammar junkies.

Whoa. Stop right there! Who said we'd be watching?

56 posted on 02/24/2009 11:35:43 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

The new language czar.

57 posted on 02/24/2009 11:46:47 AM PST by bonnieblue4me (You can put lipstick on a donkey (or a dimrat), but it is still an ass!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagahAl

His favorite word these days is “CRISIS”. How I long for just one of Reagan’s speeches today, being positive and doing REAL things to back it up. Sigh . . . (a tear falls) . . .


58 posted on 02/24/2009 12:03:28 PM PST by Twinkie (Obama is NOT Reagan !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Clinton made the same mistake in one of the debates in the general election in 1992 and no one called him on it.

I have a button with a saying attributed to King Sigismund the First:

Ego sum rex Romanus et super grammaticam.

"I am the Roman king and above grammar."

(That's probably the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund, 1410-1437, the one who gave John Huss a safe-conduct but didn't honor it).

59 posted on 02/24/2009 12:09:11 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Which is gramactically correct.
Me lost 50% of my 401K or,
I lost 50% of my 401K

You know, with all the challenges we face, the focus of the article is grammer????

That’s the drive by media for you


60 posted on 02/24/2009 12:15:19 PM PST by Steven Tyler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson