A running buddy of mine insists that “They run faster than us” is acceptable since to use “we” is too stylistic. He does not object, however, to “She runs faster than he,” which to me sounds as stylistic. (Every one runs faster than I, but that’s another topic.)
Is he correct? Is “us” acceptable?
I don’t remember the specifics (I’m sure someone will pop up with the requisite sites), but as a practical matter, when I was working as a copy editor I would have accepted “faster than us” or “faster than we do.” “Faster than we” sounds pompous and “too correct.” To say it that way, you’d be communicating so much more than your relative fleetness of foot. You’d also be saying “I’m so much smarter than you. Are.”
It should be “we,” technically. However, it is best to add “do” or “run” at the end to make it sound like normal English.
From an article entitled What tongue does the Queen speak? in The Indian Express, which sums up my sentiments on the matter:
How about adding “can”?
No, it should be us.
The phrase “she runs faster than him” is absolutely correct because than does not conjoin two independent clauses. Than is used as a preposition, hence the pronoun that follows it is not the subject of any sentence, making a first person nominative (he or we) impossible. However, in the phrase “she runs faster than he does,” the word than is not a preposition, but a conjunction which joins two independent clauses. The second independent clause, “he does,” follows the same rules as any other sentence: it requires a subject and an object, with the subject in the nominative case.
She runs faster than us.
She runs faster than we do.
…are the correct ways of expressing this idea.
MR
Maeglin, at this level of grammatic minutiae, my eyes start to glaze over (as an editor, I tried to maintain the writing’s flow by balancing the practical demands of spoken English and the dusty precision of technical grammar), but you’re up against some big guns here. From the same article:
Though I agree that, in practice, “than us”, while not preferred usage, is okay, I’d say you have a bit more work cut out for you to prove that it’s actually, technically correct.
“They run faster than we [do/run/cook/other verb]” is the correct form. “They run faster than us” is usually used in conversation (a habit I’m trying to break with some of my more enlightened friends) whereas I have not yet let such a fault escape a paper I’m proofreading.
Maeglin, last I checked adding a verb there doesn’t change the meaning or function of “we/us”. The “[run]” in “They run faster than we [run]” is generally understood, sometimes put in for emphasis. But inserting that second verb doesn’t really change the meaning or function of “us”, which should be “we”.
If you can’t rely on the Queen to speak the Queen’s English, upon whom can you rely? I’ve given up on “than we.”
BTW, what is the correct grammatical form of the expression “This is me looking up at the Eiffel Tower” (said of a photograph)? One would think you would need to use a nominative pronoun with the copula “is”. But: “this is I looking up…”? Blech.
The correct grammatical form is, “Here I am looking up at the Eiffel Tower.” (Or, "There I am . . . ")
:::: ducking and running ::::
“I look” present tense. “I am looking” present participle. But “This is I looking up” ? What is the nominative of “is”? Is it “I” or “looking”? If it is “looking,” the phrase is a gerund, with “looking” requiring an adverb: “This is my looking up.” That’s obviously wrong, so the subject is I. I guess it is acceptable to use “me.” It seems that a comma is needed: “This is me, looking up.”
What is the nominative in the sentence? It’s not looking, as that would require the pronoun to become an adverb: “This is my looking up.” So, it must be “I.” But the sentence requires a comma: “This is I, looking up at the Eiffel Tower,” as the whole phrase after “I” is a modifier, or a dependent clause. By the way, isn’t “me” acceptable after a form of the verb “to be”?
“Upon whom can we rely?” This, to me, sounds as “too correct” as “we.” Isn’t “who can we rely upon?” also coreect?
lissener, maybe you should have read the rest of the article. A 71 year old don calls it a howler? No offense to aged Englishmen, but I am not exactly going to take his word for it. Not when John Wells disagrees.
Sorry if you don’t have a taste for grammatical minuntiae, but it’s just about the only way to get to the bottom of nitpicking grammar questions. I think that examining minutiae is about the only way to understand some of the deep philosophical issues behind our grammatical structures. For example, when we say “she runs faster than we,” are we being elliptical or not? The meaning is the same, but the precise thought conveyed is not. Comparison or conjunction? Guess the jury is still out.
Barbitu8
[/quote]
“I look” present tense. “I am looking” present participle.
[/quote]
No, that’s not right. looking is a present participle. I am looking is a present tense verb with a progressive/repeating aspect.
I think you are misunderstanding what a nominative is. A nominative can only be a noun or adjective that can appropriately be used as the subject of a sentence.
Strictly speaking, “this is I” would be correct, since you are using a copula. But if you are using a demonstrative adjective/pronoun (like this or that), things change. I don’t really know why. In French, you don’t say “C’est je,” you say “c’est moi.” You are right about adding the comma, though. That makes it work, because an accusative/objective participle takes the same form as a nominative one. “This is me, looking up at the Eiffel Tower” would probably be ok, too.
“Upon whom can we rely” is correct, and “who can we rely upon” is absolutely incorrect. But since usage eventually makes grammar, it might not be too much longer before the latter is correct and the former is not.
MR
Maeglin, please read the article again. Wells did not disagree with the 71-year-old don (BTW, at what age did his knowledge become irrelevant, IYHO?), he just indicated it was “meddlesome” to point it out.
You say “than us” is correct; everyone quoted in the article disagrees with you, but one of them rolls his eyes at the pedantry of the minutiae wonks. He wasn’t suggesting they were wrong, as you are; just that they were being petty.
And obviously I did read the rest of the article: maybe you should read the rest of my post, in which I quoted the final paragraph.
lissener,
But he did applaud the Queen for changing with language. It is not meddlesome to point it out, but meddlesome to try to “interfere” with the process.
Perhaps you missed this part.
What threw you off? The “but” or the “not so sure?”
“Irrelevant” is your word not mine. I only said that I was unwilling to take Botting’s word for it, not that his age in any way invalidated his knowledge. I hope these aren’t your prejudices. They certainly aren’t mine.
Everyone quoted? Except perhaps the Queen and Wells. Wells, after all, is a professor of phonetics, a veritable science of minutiae. He didn’t roll his eyes at the pedantry, he rolled his eyes at the American interference in “what he knows best,” that language changes. Wells again:
And you are saying this man disagrees with me?
Quote it you certainly did, but I think a little something was lost in the translation, so to speak.
MR
Yes, he disagrees with you.
You say “than us” is correct. He suggests only that it’s acceptable. Please note, in my original post, that I say the same thing.
Perhaps, to be fair, it’s just a matter of interpretation. I interpret the “But not everyone is so sure,” prefacing as it does Wells eyeroll, not as a negation of the don’s ruling, but merely as an objection to the vehemence of the phrase “frightful howler”; and Wells’s subsequent praise of the Queen for changing with the language as nothing more than a vote against pedantry. In other words, you’d apparently paraphrase Wells as having said: “Give me a break. ‘Than us’ is perfectly correct”, whereas I’d paraphrase him thus: “Give me a break. ‘Than us’ is not technically correct, but it’s perfectly acceptable in everyday speech.”
Please note that both of us, Maeglin, you and I, agree that the usage is acceptable. But while you say it’s correct, I’m simply saying that even if it’s not technically correct, it’s perfectly acceptable in everyday speech.
(Whew! Talk about minutiae! Sorry for the hypocrisy . . .)
Then the crucial issue here is extremely minute: what are the criteria for technical correctness? I think the idea of correctness must be a balance old rules and change. I suppose I can give all the philosophical reasons in the world why I think “than us” is correct, including supporting documentation, and I wouldn’t get anywhere at all. If only someone held the keys to our language…
It is really interesting that both interpreted a relatively unambiguous piece of prose so differently. Other than our different points of view from the beginning, what else do you think could account for that?
Regards,
MR
Sigh. We had a thread on pronoun usage just a few days ago. I guess I’ll have to kill another one by giving the straight dope again. (No one responded to my post in that thread, so I figured you all agreed with me. Apparently, you guys forgot that you did.)
The rules about which case to use in English are really quite simple, but unfortunately are not taught in school. What they teach there are Latin rules. But we aren’t speaking Latin.
Here are the English rules:
Use the subjective case when the pronoun is the simple (i.e. non-compound) subject of a verb. The verb must be present and not implied.
Use the oblique (=objective) case in all other circumstances.
Applying them to the various samples in this thread we find that these are correct:
They run faster than us.
They run faster than we do.
She runs faster than him.
This is me looking up at the Eiffel Tower.
BTW, “looking up at the Eiffel Tower” is a gerund phrase. What else would it be?
Maybe you should have read my posts before assuming that no one agreed with you. I well know that verb ellipses, the meat and potatoes of Latin, are uncommon in English. Obviously there are grammarians who disagree with us.
You can’t tell what it is without context, Ex Lax. Remember your Latin…a gerund is a verbal noun. In this case, it is impossible to tell whether looking is a verbal noun or a verbal adjective (participle).
MR
Two key points: one is prescriptivism vs. descriptivism. There is a place for both. Precise, accurate use of the “high” language is appropriate where precision of meaning and formality of style is called for. But grammar describes how the language is used, not how it “should” be used (generally according to a formula derived from some other language’s common use, as in the distinction between predicate nominative and direct object, which derives from what cases Latin verbs took in common use).
The conjunction vs. preposition concept fits into the prescriptive mode. And either is appropriate given the situation.
But there is also the descriptive grammar concept of the “disjunctive nominative” where “It’s me” is quite grammatical, being the disjunctive form of the pronoun, just as you would say “my book” vs. “the book is mine” using proximate vs. disjunctive forms of the possessive. He who would say “it is I” in everyday speech in most of America should also be saying “the book is my” to remain within his self-constructed grammatical cage.