Feisty is as feisty does

JUNE CASAGRANDE

That Teresa Heinz Kerry: Is she feisty or what? I mean, what a little

spitfire! I just love an opinionated woman!

Most people watch major news events such as the Democratic

National Convention to hear the messages of the speakers. But

watching such events, I encounter the same problem as I do when I

read a newspaper. Any little language issue that catches my attention

obscures the message.

So, if I were to read: “Both Democrats and Republicans have vowed

to outlaw the polka in all 50 states,” I wouldn’t have the normal

response of: “It’s about darn time someone did something about the

polka epidemic in this country.” No, my little brain stops after the

word both, triggering an abnormal response such as, “Both Democrats

and Republicans? What? There are only two Democrats? Doesn’t the

writer know that the word ‘both’ is useless and potentially confusing

here?”

This is my gift. This is my curse.

Luckily, this year’s convention has proved to be a good one for

word nerds like me, with a few gems for language lovers.

One of my favorite moments came during Elizabeth Edwards’

introduction of her husband. At one point, while talking about their

years together, Edwards finished a sentence with something like, “

... that’s been very important for John and for me.”

And while the little throwaway phrase probably didn’t garner a

drop of ink in the thousands of words written about the convention,

to me it was an incredibly clever way to sidestep a vexing language

problem.

You see, most people don’t know whether to say “John and I” or

“John and me.” Rather than navigate a scary grammar world in which

most people don’t even know where to begin to look for answers, they

just opt for the one that sounds correct -- the one that makes them

sound more educated. And I’m not just talking about the rank-and-file

masses: writers, editors, PhDs -- you name ‘em, I’ve heard them make

this mistake.

As I’ve pointed out before, it’s ironic that they would never make

the same mistake were the “John and” part omitted. No one would say,

“Please watch the convention with I,” any more than one would say,

“Me want to watch the convention.”

Yet you throw that “John and” in front of something, and suddenly

everything people instinctively understand about subject and object

pronouns goes flying out the window. This, of course, is the key to

knowing which one to use: Drop the “John and” part, and it becomes

clear that “I” is a subject and “me” is an object. That’s why it’s

correct to say, “This is an important day for John and me.”

Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t know this, so even if you use

the correct pronoun, about half your listeners might still think you

made a mistake. Hence the genius of Edwards’ choice of words: She

found a way to make it clear to tens of millions of people at once

that she was speaking correctly. It was the “and for” in “ ... for

John and for me” that did it. Every one of the millions of ears

listening surely recognized that “for I” would have sounded wrong and

“for me” sounded right.

Heinz Kerry’s talk was also a feast for a language lover. Heinz

Kerry, who has been called “opinionated” in more instances than a

Yahoo search can retrieve, said: “My only hope is that one day soon,

women, who have all earned the right to have their opinions, instead

of being labeled opinionated, will be called smart or well-informed,

just as men are.”

Now I’m someone who pays attention to this stuff. I cringe every

time I hear words like “feisty,” “spunky” or “spitfire.” Any man who

displayed the characteristics that earn women these labels would

instead be called “bold,” “strong,” “decisive,” even “contentious” or

“confrontational” -- but never something as trivializing as “feisty.”

My moral outrage is no cuter than a guy’s -- got it?

But I never noticed that “opinionated” is, in fact, a word used

mainly to distinguish one group of women from the masses.

“Opinionated women” are a subset of “women,” distinguished by the

fact that they have opinions, unlike the larger group, or so the word

would suggest.

But that’s just the opinion of one feisty gal, one nitpicky biddy.

Feel free to dismiss it as either abrasively unladylike or totally

adorable.

* JUNE CASAGRANDE is a freelance writer. She can be reached at

[email protected].