# Is this sentence grammatical? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 8, 2016, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303 "2016-05-08T16:40:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/21 "2016-05-09T10:20:56Z")
It’s just a furtherance of using “myself,” which it itself a “polite” or pseudo-formal circumlocution for “I.” It is no more or less grammatical than merely using “myself.” ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/22 "2016-05-09T11:10:36Z")
> [@Mr\_Shine](#): > > It doesn’t matter how many people start to use “myself” as a non-reflexive pronoun; it will still be wrong and people who do it will be stupid, even if in 70 years time I’m the very last old man who sees the difference. Did you see my post above? Your righteous indignation comes about 1200 years too late, because that’s how long people have been using the word in this sense. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Shine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr_shine/32/464_2.png) [@Mr\_Shine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Shine)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/23 "2016-05-09T12:04:57Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Did you see my post above? Your righteous indignation comes about 1200 years too late, because that’s how long people have been using the word in this sense. In your example, I is the pronoun and myself adds emphasis. There was nothing wrong with the example in your post, and has no relevance to my post which you just quoted, which was not disputing that. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/24 "2016-05-09T13:03:09Z")
But my post also mentioned that “myself” has been used as a non-reflexive pronoun, as a subject or object of a verb (indeed, sometimes as the _only_ subject or object of a verb), since the Middle Ages. Isn’t this the sort of use that you’re speaking out against? ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/25 "2016-05-09T13:18:17Z")
Here are some examples from authors who many consider to have a good command of the English language, running the gamut from middle to modern English: “My-selven can not telle why The sooth.” (Chaucer, 1369) “Ther was also a Reve and a Millere, …and my-self.” (Chaucer, 1386) “My selfe haue Letters of the selfe-same Tenure.” (Shakespeare, 1601) “He tauld mysel’ by word o’ mouth, He’d tak’ my letter.” (Burns, 1789) “No savage man inquired, ‘What am myself?’” (Browning, 1896) It’s ridiculous to bemoan that people are “starting” to use “myself” as a non-reflexive pronoun when we’ve actually been doing it all along for centuries, in many cases in texts widely held to be the pinnacles of English literature. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/26 "2016-05-09T13:19:41Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > _“Right now you, Jack and me myself are the only people in the world who know this secret.”_ > > The _myself_ isn’t necessary there; it’s included for emphasis. I wouldn’t say that that sentence was ungrammatical. No? Looks a tad ungrammatical to _me_. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/27 "2016-05-09T13:23:38Z")
She said it was spelted “Sara” … ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/28 "2016-05-09T14:35:23Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > It’s just a furtherance of using “myself,” which it itself a “polite” or pseudo-formal circumlocution for “I.” > > It is no more or less grammatical than merely using “myself.” “Myself” is not just another way of saying “I.” It’s only for when you are referring to yourself in an action, for instance, “I cut myself.” You wouldn’t say “Myself went downtown.” Just as you wouldn’t say to someone else, “Yourself go first.” You would just say “You go first.” (You could say “Go f\*\*k yourself,” because that involves the person acting upon himself, if such an act is even possible.) ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/29 "2016-05-09T14:36:40Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Did you see my post above? Your righteous indignation comes about 1200 years too late, because that’s how long people have been using the word in this sense. Well, now they should stop. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/30 "2016-05-09T15:58:21Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > I’m gonna buck the trend and agree that, though incorrect, “my good self” doesn’t violate any laws of grammar. Breaking up “myself” into separate words enables “self” to be used nominatively, as in “one’s own self.” > > However the sentence now, though grammatically correct, is nevertheless incorrect. David and Sarah are going to the park with YOU, not your self. Well, the phrase _his/her good self_ is a kind of formulaic, now somewhat rare way to refer to another person with respect, wherein _self_ takes on a kind of metonymic role. (Using it in the first person, though, is probably done humorously.) > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Well, now they should stop. Grammaticality in English (indeed, as probably in all languages) is not always a black or white issue, and there’s no reason why certain usages can’t be accepted in certain syntactic contexts where they serve a good, expressive and practical purpose. Whether it be formulaic phrases which persist despite all the “rules” (_woe is me_), or patterns in certain contexts (using reflexive pronouns as subject pronouns in comparatives), that kind of simplistic, binary approach ignores how resourceful people can be with language. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/31 "2016-05-09T16:04:42Z")
> [@guizot](#): > > Well, the phrase _his/her good self_ is a kind of formulaic, now somewhat rare way to refer to another person with respect, wherein _self_ takes on a kind of metonymic role. (Using it in the first person, though, is probably done humorously.) Grammaticality in English (indeed, as probably in all languages) is not always a black or white issue, and there’s no reason why certain usages can’t be accepted in certain syntactic contexts where they serve a good, expressive and practical purpose. Of course. But this isn’t one of those cases. > [@](#): > > Whether it be formulaic phrases which persist despite all the “rules” (_woe is me_), or patterns in certain contexts (using reflexive pronouns as subject pronouns in comparatives), that kind of simplistic, binary approach ignores how resourceful people can be with language. Yeah, okay. They should still stop. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/32 "2016-05-09T16:25:41Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Yeah, okay. They should still stop. Why? Just because you’ve decided to invent some arbitrary linguistic rule that conflicts with a millennium of established usage? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/33 "2016-05-09T16:27:39Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Why? Just because you’ve decided to invent some arbitrary linguistic rule that conflicts with a millennium of established usage? It’s not arbitrary. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/34 "2016-05-09T16:44:15Z")
> [@Mr\_Shine](#): > > It doesn’t matter how many people start to use “myself” as a non-reflexive pronoun; it will still be wrong and people who do it will be stupid, even if in 70 years time I’m the very last old man who sees the difference. . . So you are saying that someone like Oxford-educated, British writer Stephen Glover, co-founder of the _Independent_, is wrong and stupid, because he writes a sentence like this?: [QUOTE=Stephen Glover, in New Statesman, Sept. 5, 2014] However, what journalists such as **myself** wonder is why the excesses of the press can not be dealt with by the criminal and civil law, as in the case that led to the recent jailing of Andy Coulson and his two NoW colleagues. [/quote] ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/35 "2016-05-09T17:04:38Z")
> [@guizot](#): > > So you are saying that someone like Oxford-educated, British writer Stephen Glover, co-founder of the _Independent_, is wrong and stupid, because he writes a sentence like this?: Oxford-educated, eh? Then he should probably go by the Oxford dictionary. > **[Oxford Languages | The Home of Language Data](https://languages.oup.com/)** > > Explore Oxford Languages, the home of world-renowned language data. BTW, note that this link does open the possibility of using myself in other ways, but only in narrow terms, which should please you–but not in the way Glover did. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/36 "2016-05-09T17:51:20Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Oxford-educated, eh? Then he should probably go by the Oxford dictionary. > > [http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/when-to-use-myself-and-yourself](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/when-to-use-myself-and-yourself) > > BTW, note that this link does open the possibility of using myself in other ways, but only in narrow terms, which should please you–but not in the way Glover did. That page doesn’t even address comparative structures such as the one I cited, so it’s not complete. But that’s beside the point, because it just says “many people object or dislike like” those other particular usages, which, of course, is true. On the other hand, I have many other examples of editors accepting the comparative structure, from publications such as _Foreign Affairs_, the _Lancet_, _American Studies International_, _Christian Science Monitor_, _New York Times_, on so on, which is just to point out that it’s not a black or white issue. These are not proclamations from God–you don’t have to cling to them religiously. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/37 "2016-05-09T17:52:18Z")
> [@guizot](#): > > That page doesn’t even address comparative structures such as the one I cited, so it’s not complete. But that’s beside the point, because it just says “many people object or dislike like” those other particular usages, which, of course, is true. On the other hand, I have many other examples of editors accepting the comparative structure, from publications such as _Foreign Affairs_, the _Lancet_, _American Studies International_, _Christian Science Monitor_, _New York Times_, on so on, which is just to point out that it’s not a black or white issue. These are not proclamations from God–you don’t have to cling to them religiously. Not clinging. Just saying I think they are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/38 "2016-05-09T17:54:35Z")
Nobody has pointed out that the thread title is in error? “Grammatical” simply means a sentence uses grammar, not that it is grammatically correct. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/39 "2016-05-09T18:54:15Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Oxford-educated, eh? Then he should probably go by the Oxford dictionary. > > [http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/when-to-use-myself-and-yourself](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/when-to-use-myself-and-yourself) But that’s not the Oxford dictionary; that’s a web page from the publisher discussing some aspects of the reflexive and non-reflexive uses of “myself”. What the _Oxford English Dictionary_ itself actually says about “myself” was quoted in a previous message. I don’t know why you’re choosing to ignore it. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > “Grammatical” simply means a sentence uses grammar, not that it is grammatically correct. If you’d taken your own advice and consulted _Oxford_, you’d see that “grammatical” can be defined as “conforming to the rules of grammar”. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303/40 "2016-05-09T19:17:28Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > But that’s not the Oxford dictionary; that’s a web page from the publisher discussing some aspects of the reflexive and non-reflexive uses of “myself”. What the _Oxford English Dictionary_ itself actually says about “myself” was quoted in a previous message. I don’t know why you’re choosing to ignore it. Didn’t see it. Oh well, never mind. I disagree with Oxford. > [@](#): > > If you’d taken your own advice and consulted _Oxford_, you’d see that “grammatical” can be defined as “conforming to the rules of grammar”. Well they should stop doing that too! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-sentence-grammatical/754303.md?page=3)