[Spliff]

Instead, I found myself making fun of writers most people didn't read anymore, under the tutelage of a young man far more successful than I.

I came across this in a NY Times essay by a professional writer. I believe it's wrong. Shouldn't it actually read, "far more successful than me"?

[scottiB]

"I" is correct. "...[F]ar more succesful than I [am]." The verb to the subject "I" is implied.

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by scottiB

"I" is correct. "...[F]ar more succesful than I [am]." The verb to the subject "I" is implied.

Me agree. Oh, wait, sorry. I agree.
But in all seriousness, scottiB is correct; "me" is not.

[RAILhead]

Correct. Thirded.

Maury

[Ganesha]

I also will side with the "I" being correct. Since the first part of the sentence, defines the subject as 'I' and not 'a young man'.

[lavar78]

"I" is correct.

[tavilach]

Originally Posted by lavar78

"I" is correct.

Except after "C"!

[ManOfSteal]

ManOfSteal concurs.

[macamac]

Me is correct. I mean I am. No. I say me is correct. Never mind.

[ghporter]

Correct but... Darn that's clumsy construction! Why make the sentence harder to understand? It is built of all the right pieces, but they just aren't in the locations that work best for them.

Instead of

Instead, I found myself making fun of writers most people didn't read anymore, under the tutelage of a young man far more successful than I.

I would have done this:

Instead, under the tutelage of a young man far more successful than I, I found myself making fun of writers most people didn't read anymore.

In my example, the condition ("under the tutelage...") is placed early in the sentence, with the action ("I found myself...") placed at the end. A simple change, but look at the difference in how it reads. The only problem is putting the two "I" pronouns next to each other, which seems clumsy, but still works.

On the whole, placing the conditional phrase first makes the meaning of that phrase clearer. Of course the New York Times has a reputation for not being an "easy read," so the construction the author used may have been intentional. It would not be the first time obfuscation and clumsiness had been used to simulate erudition.

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by ghporter

It would not be the first time obfuscation and clumsiness had been used to simulate erudition.

No. "...it would not have been the first time obfuscation and clumsiness were used to simulate erudition."

[ghporter]

ZING! Ya got me!

[tavilach]

Originally Posted by ghporter

ZING! Ya got me!

Fragment alert! I suppose that makes two...

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by scottiB

"I" is correct. "...[F]ar more succesful than I [am]." The verb to the subject "I" is implied.

Ah, that's right. I forgot about the implied "am." I get fooled by this every once and a while. Time to crack open the English grammar texts again. It's been a while.

[Cubeoid]

I agree to agree on the following note: I do not agree

[misc]

I have always thought that contractions were a no-no.

[Millennium]

Although the sentence is awkwardly-written, it is technically correct as far as grammar goes. "I" is the subjective case, while "me" is the objective case. The implied "am" is a good rule of thumb, but this is the underlying mechanism.

If you've ever wondered how to use "thee" and "thou" correctly, they actually work on a similar principle: "thou" is subjective (and thus follows an implied "are" -or "art"- rule) and "thee" is objective. Note that these are always singular: the correct archaic plural form is simply "you".

[saddino]

Originally Posted by Spliff

I came across this in a NY Times essay by a professional writer. I believe it's wrong. Shouldn't it actually read, "far more successful than me"?

Correct, as others have stated. But, this construction is very similar to a grammatical problem that is often abused by those who think "I" is always correct: using "I" instead of "me" as the object of a preposition.

Ex: She gave the book to Lucy and I. [wrong]

Now, for the commonfolk who use "me" everywhere, all the time (including, erroneously as the subject of a sentence), this little problem never strikes. But, for those who have incorrectly "learned" to use "I" instead of "me" in all cases, this mistake is actually quite common. You won't find it in print (editors catch it), but you'll hear it from politicians and CEOs all the time.

[Randman]

Under the tutelage of a young man far more successful, I found myself making fun of writers most people don't read any longer.

Here's another variation since the original one was grammatically correct but clumsy.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Correct but... Darn that's clumsy construction! Why make the sentence harder to understand? It is built of all the right pieces, but they just aren't in the locations that work best for them.

[SNIP]

In my example, the condition ("under the tutelage...") is placed early in the sentence, with the action ("I found myself...") placed at the end. A simple change, but look at the difference in how it reads. The only problem is putting the two "I" pronouns next to each other, which seems clumsy, but still works.

On the whole, placing the conditional phrase first makes the meaning of that phrase clearer. Of course the New York Times has a reputation for not being an "easy read," so the construction the author used may have been intentional. It would not be the first time obfuscation and clumsiness had been used to simulate erudition.

The general wording of the sentences is awkward — "than I" is a grammatically correct abomination — but I think the original actually sounds like a better order for the clauses. Yours makes it sound like the tutelage is the important part of the sentence ("I couldn't have done it without that tutelage"), whereas the original makes it sound like an afterthought.

[turtle777]

I better don't say nothing on a thread that's talks on grammatical correctly sentencez.

-t

[Goldfinger]

I would say "myself" or "I".

[karent]

Originally Posted by Millennium

If you've ever wondered how to use "thee" and "thou" correctly, they actually work on a similar principle: "thou" is subjective (and thus follows an implied "are" -or "art"- rule) and "thee" is objective. Note that these are always singular: the correct archaic plural form is simply "you".

This is cool, thanks, never knew about the thee/thou thing before.

The grammatical mistake that drive me absolutely nuts is the misuse of "me" and "I" in prepositional phrases, as in "Between you and I, he'll never keep his mouth shut."

Wrong Wrong Wrong!

I" is the subjective, "me" is objective. "Between" is the preposition, so "you and me" is the correct object of the preposition, not "you and I." If you're ever in doubt, just switch the pronouns, "between I and you, he'll..." or "between me and you, ...." Which sounds better?

Don't get me started on the misuse of "myself."

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by karent

Don't get me started on the misuse of "myself."

Instead, I found myself making fun of writers most people didn't read anymore, under the tutelage of a young man far more successful than myself

So is this wrong ?

[ReggieX]

Sentence fragment.

Another.

A good device, will use more later.

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

So is this wrong ?

Yeah, the structure implies that it's the other writers who are under the tutelage.

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

So is this wrong ?

Very ever so much.

[Warung]

Though I am not sure about the rule here, somehow "me" sounds correct to I...eerrrr...me.

[Oisín]

I'm surprised that only one person here has said that they think 'me' sounds correct after a comparison with 'than'; this phenomenon of the nominative case (subjective case in English) turning into either the accusative or the dative case (though usually the accusative—and, of course, the objective case in English) occurs in nearly all Germanic languages, and in certain languages (such as Danish, Norwegian and, as far as I know, also Icelandic, but not Swedish) the accusative form is now the only acceptable form.

The reason for this is that 'than' (or 'end', 'enn' or 'en' for the other three) tends to 'feel' like a preposition, even in the cases where it's used as a conjunction, and it is coded into us quite well that prepositions require some kind of objective case.

Actually, as far as I've understood it (even in English), since 'than' in the sentence in this thread is used as a preposition, not a conjunction, writing 'me' would have been equally correct (and would have been the original form). Had there been a verb explicitly stated: “a young man far more successful than I am”, there is no doubt it should be I, not me (apart from the fact that the sentence would then have required another verb inserted, turning the sentence into a relative clause: “a young man who was far more succesful than I am”).

However, there is not; and as such, despite the traditional view of English grammarians (and despite that using 'I' is simply generally considered more correct, or at least more formal), I would claim that 'me' is the more logical and prescriptively correct of the two.

[d.fine]

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by d.fine

To my post, or to the thread in general?

[d.fine]

Your post... I didn't get squatt, I'm terrible at these things.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Spliff

I came across this in a NY Times essay by a professional writer. I believe it's wrong. Shouldn't it actually read, "far more successful than me"?

S1: My friends and I are going to the movie.
S2: Me and my friends are going to the movie.

The top one is correct, and here's an easy way to remember when to use "me" and "I." Pretty soon it becomes second nature, but it's a good excersize. Just ask the question and how you would answer it in first person:

Who's going to the movie? I am going to the movie. So, my friends and I are going to the movie.

Here's an example of when to use "me." (Yes, Mel Brooke's has it right.)

S1: Your father hired Captain Lonestar and me to rescue you.
S2: Your father hired Captain Lonestar and I to rescue you.

Again, just put it into a question. Who hired who to do the rescuing? King Roland hired me to do the rescuing. So, your father hired Captain Lonestar and me to rescue you.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

S1: Your father hired Captain Lonestar and me to rescue you.
S2: Your father hired Captain Lonestar and I to rescue you.

Again, just put it into a question. Who hired who to do the rescuing? King Roland hired me to do the rescuing. So, your father hired Captain Lonestar and me to rescue you.

King Roland?

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by Oisín

King Roland?

AMX 30 Roland?



SWEET!!

[FulcrumPilot]

Condordant with most others that I find myself disposed.

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Oisín

King Roland?

Father of Princess Vespa, of course!

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by lavar78

Father of Princess Vespa, of course!

Err... of course.

*sucks at classics*

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

The top one is correct, and here's an easy way to remember when to use "me" and "I." Pretty soon it becomes second nature, but it's a good excersize. Just ask the question and how you would answer it in first person:

Even easier: just leave out anyone else and restate the sentence:

S1: I am going to the movie.
S1: Your father hired me to rescue you.

And it's "Mel Brooks."

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Oisín

Err... of course.

*sucks at classics*

Well, I think Spaceballs is a classic, but I'm not sure everyone would agree.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Spliff

I came across this in a NY Times essay by a professional writer. I believe it's wrong. Shouldn't it actually read, "far more successful than me"?

What I was wondering was this:

'under the tutelage of a writer far more successful than I'

'of' takes the objective case.

e.g. I'll destroy the better of him.

Normally, 'than' takes the subjective case but only because the subject of comparison is normally in the subjective case.

e.g. You kill better than I.

(Subjects of verbs are not always in the subjective case. You can have accusative infinitive constructions in English, although admitedly they are clumbsy).

Now since the 'writer' is in the objective case after 'of', should not comparison 'I' also be in the objective case? Both sides of the comparison should be in the same case afterall.

In this case, I'd say that 'me' is more correct.

[ghporter]

As olepigeon points out, the "I/me" test works very well. If refactoring the sencence is hard, just simplify it all the way down to the barest bones: "I am going" works where "Me am going" does not. "He gave it to me" works where "He gave it to I" does not. It is very simple and ANYONE can use this tool to ensure the correct pronoun usage. So why is it that we see this as a problem of considerable magnitude? Because so few people think about the pronoun they use; "he," "she," and "they" are all very simple and have only one form, where the personal pronoun is one or the other. Yep, sometimes English sucks.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Because so few people think about the pronoun they use; "he," "she," and "they" are all very simple and have only one form, where the personal pronoun is one or the other. Yep, sometimes English sucks.

Those pronouns inflect aswell.

He - subjective
him - objective
his - possessive

She - subjective
her - objective
her(s) - possessive

It - subjective
it - objective
its/his - objective

They - subjective
them - objective
their(s) - possessive

In fact, nearly all pronouns inflect. But compare the amount of inflections we have to Polish which inflects nouns, adjectives and verbs (to greater degree) as well!

[ghporter]

undotwa, you make an excellent point, and my example was obviously oversimplified. I skipped over the fact that so many people can't inflect the other pronouns properly, but it is something that bothers me just about every day.

I am back in college (yet again!) and the young people around me seem to have no sense that they convey-at least to someone raised to at least attempt to use English correctly-a complete lack of verbal competence in their word choices.

Sometimes the professors abuse English just as badly! Consider how difficult it becomes for me to try to learn from a PhD who can't speak correctly, particularly when I have spent over a decade as an educator myself, and MY presentations HAD TO BE grammatically correct as a standard of my performance.

Maybe I am expressing some kind of prejudicial thought process when I judge a person on his or her speech. That is probably true. I don't care. I think that someone who grossly misuses his or her language cannot effectively express his or her thoughts, and invites massive misinterpretation of his or her words. Further, as language constitutes the symbols we use to think with, it indicates to me a lack of intellectual rigor-poor speech or writing is a sign of a lack of thorough and well structured thought. So I'm a "languageist."

At least when I say something, I use (relatively) proper grammar and syntax, and my word choice shows a precision in my thought process indicative of thorough and (hopefully) well structured thought. When I say "horse," I do not mean "horse-like creature with stripes" or "short, horse-like creature with a slender tail." If those were what I had meant, I would have said "zebra" or "donkey" instead of "horse."

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by undotwa

What I was wondering was this:

'under the tutelage of a writer far more successful than I'

'of' takes the objective case.

e.g. I'll destroy the better of him.

Normally, 'than' takes the subjective case but only because the subject of comparison is normally in the subjective case.

e.g. You kill better than I.

(Subjects of verbs are not always in the subjective case. You can have accusative infinitive constructions in English, although admitedly they are clumbsy).

Now since the 'writer' is in the objective case after 'of', should not comparison 'I' also be in the objective case? Both sides of the comparison should be in the same case afterall.

In this case, I'd say that 'me' is more correct.

"under the tutelage of a writer (who is) far more successful than I (am)"

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by lavar78

"under the tutelage of a writer (who is) far more successful than I (am)"

But by introducing (who is)...(am) into the sentence, you are changing the word class of 'than', and thus the case it requires; so while the sentence might still mean the same, the grammatical structure of it is different.



undotwa, I don't think your logic quite works here. 'Under the tutelage of [sb]' is not a partitive genitive construction such as 'the better of him': if you change the object of 'of' into a pronoun, it will become a possessive pronoun instead, ie. 'Under his tutelage', rather than 'Under the tutelage of him'.

Therefore, logically, 'a younger man' is not the direct object of 'of'; rather, the object of 'of' is 'a young man far more successful than I' as a whole, and 'a writer' and 'I' shouldn't have to agree in case necessarily (except if you choose to accept my 'theory' above, that 'than', when used as a preposition, takes the objective case, not the subjective).

[analogika]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Who hired who to do the rescuing?

You have hereby been whomed.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Oisín

But by introducing (who is)...(am) into the sentence, you are changing the word class of 'than', and thus the case it requires; so while the sentence might still mean the same, the grammatical structure of it is different.



undotwa, I don't think your logic quite works here. 'Under the tutelage of [sb]' is not a partitive genitive construction such as 'the better of him': if you change the object of 'of' into a pronoun, it will become a possessive pronoun instead, ie. 'Under his tutelage', rather than 'Under the tutelage of him'.

Therefore, logically, 'a younger man' is not the direct object of 'of'; rather, the object of 'of' is 'a young man far more successful than I' as a whole, and 'a writer' and 'I' shouldn't have to agree in case necessarily (except if you choose to accept my 'theory' above, that 'than', when used as a preposition, takes the objective case, not the subjective).

I was not equivocating the two constructions, merely citing it as an example on the usage of 'of', which always takes the objective case (side note: Although in form it is the same, strictly speaking I don't understand why it is called the 'objective' case following a preposition like 'of'; 'tutelage' after all is not the object of any verb).

See it like this:

the tutelage of a writer far more successful than I

The subject of both sides of the comparison must be in the same case. 'writer' is in the objective case, following 'of'. Therefore, 'I' should be in the objective case.

An objective pronoun can follow 'of'. e.g.

'The tutelage of me', 'a follower of me' instead of 'my tutelage' or 'my follower'.

'me' can be correctly used, with 'of' assumed. But a more correct pronoun to use would be 'mine' (as it follows more gently on the native's tongue), which is grammatically equivalent to 'of me'. If we substitute 'of a writer' with the possessive case 'writer's' (which is grammatically equivalent) the necessity of both sides of the comparison to have the same case is accentuated:

'Under a writer's tutelage far more successful than mine' rather than:

'Under a writer's tutelage far more successful than I', which sounds very queer.
(me cannot be used in this case as 'of' was not used in the first side of the comparison)

Therefore, 'I' is definitely wrong. 'me' is technically correct as 'of' can often be left out in lists or comparisons (e.g. 'He was the source of trouble and perdition', 'there is more of me than him' but in this case, 'mine' fits better.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Oisín

undotwa, I don't think your logic quite works here. 'Under the tutelage of [sb]' is not a partitive genitive construction such as 'the better of him': if you change the object of 'of' into a pronoun, it will become a possessive pronoun instead, ie. 'Under his tutelage', rather than 'Under the tutelage of him'.

It doesn't matter how you classify a construction based upon 'of', it always takes a form of the objective case.

Here is an example how comparisons must keep the same case:

He is a greater follower of me than (of) him.

Because we are comparing 'me' to 'him', both must be in the objective case after 'of'.

However, if we have:

I am greater follower than he

Because, we are comparing the grammatical subjects, the comparison must be in the subjective case to match.

In 'tutelage of a writer far more successful than I', the comparison is 'of a writer far more successful' to the first person pronoun. Since 'writer' follows 'of', it is in the objective case. And since the first person pronoun is what is compared it must also be in the objective case.

Therefore you can have either:

'under the tutelage of a writer far more successful than (of) me'

or

'under a writer's tutelage far more successful than mine'

since 'writer's' and 'mine' are grammatically equivalent to 'of a writer' and 'of me'.

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Oisín

But by introducing (who is)...(am) into the sentence, you are changing the word class of 'than', and thus the case it requires; so while the sentence might still mean the same, the grammatical structure of it is different.

I'm not introducing them; I'm arguing they're understood.

"under the tutelage of a writer (who is) far more successful than I (am)"

OTOH, I'd agree with him if it had been the following:

"under the tutelage of a far more successful writer than me"