Strict grammarians insist on “that was I” based on the rule that pronouns following the “to be” verbs use the - what - the subjective form? I don’t remember the terminology so much as the rule. But “that was I” usually sounds either stupid, pompous, or plain wrong depending on the audience.
Like most people I do my best to avoid the choice altogether by restructuring the sentence to something like “I was the guy doing the whatever.”
I think the term you’re looking for is the “nominative predicate.” Technically, yes, one should say “That was I.” Unfortunately, this sounds pompous and may get one pelted with stuff. As does pretty much everyone who is not an Oxford don, I say “That was me.”
There is a seemingly-endless parade of New Yorker cartoons whose punch line is “It is I.” It simply sounds funny. While the rule would seem to indicate “It is I” is correct, the ear of native speakers indicates otherwise.
In all these cases, the ear rules. The rule must admit an exception.
This is the difference between ‘Prescriptive’ versus ‘Descriptive’ grammar. I am stating what is (and saying it is OK) and you are taking a rule from a book and saying it is OK.
English (unlike French and Spanish amongst others) does not have ruling body. If the Royal Academy wants to strike a letter out of Spanish it can (and has). English is organic.
Consider the body of evidence. On one hand are a number of books, on the other is the vast body of written and spoken usage. Which is more persuasive to you?
Grammar rules are erratic and silly. When we write them, we often write ourselves into a corner. I would suggest to you this rule is simply miswritten.
“That was I” is not part of any language I speak. I say “that was me”.
It was once pointed out to me that the “rule” requiring predicative complements to be nominative becomes even more absurd in this particular context: imagine flipping through an old photo album, pointing at a picture, and saying something like, “Oh, and this is I when I was just six years old.” Blech.
Not miswritten is rule. Rule be correct. You is miswritten. Ha ha. Rules bes whichever me says it are. Vegetables is organic. Make I joke? Me master of language. Coherence no matter, you understand I, is difference if you has to struggle? No. Only thing what matter be me gets do what me wants, and me be correct. No go school. No learn stupid stuff. Me contradict self? Ha ha. Me large, multitudes contains.
OK, this is IMHO so let’s not have another “prescriptive vs. descriptive” debate. I assume, pseudo, that you prefer “it is I” even in casual conversation. Correct?
Not really. I’m just conceding that when I say “It is me” I’m speaking ungrammatically. No big deal. I do it all the time.
If I was to give a formal speech using the phrase “It was me” I’d probably change it to “It was I.” (And of course that should be “If I were to give a formal speech…”)
I’d be very curious to know how you define “grammatically” in such a way that that statement is true. What are you appealing to? Authority? Logic? Tradition?
The way professional linguists define grammaticality, it would certainly be false that “it is me” is in any way ungrammatical.
Quite obviously. “It is I” sounds ridiculous and unnatural to all native English speakers, and the phrase only exists as a deliberately learned phrase - one that seems confined to circumstances when the user wishes to show off.
It’s based upon a misconception on the part of the 18th century grammarians who also spread nonsense about not “splitting infinitives” or ending sentences with prepositions (although, in the latter case, formal usage has changed to the point where it’s normal - again, only in formal registers - to avoid stranding prepositions.) The folks who came up with these rules did so on the basis of the false application of Latin grammar to English. In this case, it was based on the Latin copula, ESSE, which puts both items in the same case. The English copula, be, simply does not work that way.
It was not prevailing usage at the time, and it hasn’t become so since then, either. The statement that it is “correct grammar” is false, as it is not the norm for speakers of English; it sounds stilted and odd precisely because it’s in contrast to English grammar. I’ll avoid spending too much time reflecting on the pomposity of folks who would use phrases like “It is I”, but frankly, most people would laugh at you for doing so. Doubly so for those of us who know something about grammar.
The claim that “It is I” is proper grammar is simply unjustifiable - there is no evidence to support it; it’s the result of an unholy grafting of a Latin rule onto English. There’s nothing correct about it - and the instinct of native speakers is good evidence of that.
Cite? What do you mean when you say “grammarian”? Frankly, I wasn’t aware that even the worst of the prescriptivists were making that claim anymore. Linguists, on the other hand, are quite clear on the issue: it is simply bizarre and contrary to all evidence to claim that “It is I” could possibly be a well-formed utterance in English.
I’d like to see your source on this; it doesn’t sound typical of any dialect of English that I’ve ever heard of - indeed, it’s most remarkable, as one could imagine the generalization of the past tense suffix to be, resulting in be’d (though I’ve never heard of that in any English dialect.) The use of -s, the third person singular present tense suffix, to signal first person and past tense is absolutely extraordinary. Certain types of language impairment might, I suppose, result in that utterance, but if it’s actually typical of a particular dialect, I’d love to learn more about it.
As far as I can determine, “It is I” (or worse, “that was I”) is occupying a space somewhere between not ending a sentence with a preposition (a pseudo-rule that could be followed if it makes the sentence sound more elegant) and not splitting infinitives (is not a rule, never was, and usually does not help anything).
If “strict grammarians” are still insisting on the “it is I” thing, they’re just out of touch. It has nothing to do with the usual battles over proper vs. improper grammar; it has to do with recognizing that a particular standard never had anything to do with the basic structure of English to begin with, any more than it would to insist that French speakers ought to say “c’est je” (instead of “c’est moi”) or, conversely, that Spanish speakers ought to say “es mí” (instead of “soy yo”) to conform to English usage.
The people who don’t say “it is I” are not uneducated or speaking a basilect or informal variety. They’re speaking, and writing, perfectly acceptable, standard English, and the only ones who argue against them are the ones who inhaled their rules uncritically without bothering to know anything about the language itself.