Sticking to what’s right and wrong

JUNE CASAGRANDE

What’s more annoying: the person who says in casual conversation “it

was me,” which is incorrect, or a person who says “it was I,” which

is correct? Are you more put off by people who, either through

ignorance or defiance, neglect to use “whom” or by people who

actually use it? Do you wince when a speaker ends a sentence with a

preposition, or is it a bigger turn-off when the speaker goes out of

his way to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition? Do you want to

correct the person who says “can I,” or do you want to slap the

person who opts for the more-correct-but-sometimes-stuffy “may I”?

Today I’m less interested in correct language and more interested

in the case for wrong language. In the years I’ve been a copy editor

and in the time I’ve been writing this column, I’ve encountered many

people who know an awful lot about correct grammar and usage. But

I’ve never known a single person who spoke correctly all the time.

What’s up with that? Is correct language an impossible ideal? And if

so, what should we do about it?

I don’t claim to have the answers to these questions, but as a

columnist it’s my job to pretend that I do. So here are my

just-made-up thoughts on this bizarre gulf between correct and

realistic.

The people who teach language need to de-emphasize right and wrong

and emphasize instead the idea that correct English is a tool

students can use -- or not.

It’s a choice -- a weapon students can keep in their arsenals but

one they don’t always have to wield. Grammar is for them, not against

them. Adults need to let kids know they understand that no

12-year-old is going to say, “Hey, Tyler, with whom are you going to

the movies?”

Once kids know that their teachers are firmly grounded on planet

Earth, then it’s possible to make the case that the stuff could come

in handy someday -- just like math and history. Otherwise, kids step

straight out of English class into a world in which parents, peers,

newscasters and rap stars demonstrate why they should ignore

everything they just learned.

If you don’t want to take it from me, consider the famously

over-quoted Winston Churchill response to those who say it’s “wrong”

to end a sentence with a preposition: “This is the type of arrant

pedantry up with which I shall not put.” In fact, the “rule” he’s

mocking doesn’t even exist. Most language experts agree it’s a myth

and say instead that you should avoid ending sentences with

prepositions except when to do so is just too awkward.

The “can I” versus “may I” issue is similar. In formal English,

“can” means “to be able to” and “may” means “to be permitted to.” But

the experts aren’t so stringent. “In colloquial English, ‘can’ also

expresses a request for permission. ‘Can I go to the movies?’” say

the editors of the Chicago Manual of Style.

The question of “it was me” versus “it was I,” which I also used

in the first paragraph of this column, is just a rule called the

“predicate nominative.” This rule, perhaps one of the biggest

turn-offs in grammar, is really a simple concept with an even simpler

application. Sentences that contain two things that are really the

same thing and are connected by the verb “to be” take the subject

pronoun form. “He is the king.” “The king is he.” “I am the one who

is going to get a lot of angry e-mails for stirring up this

controversy.” “The person who is going to get a lot of angry e-mails

is I.” Think of them as reversible sentences and nothing more.

The final of my examples above, “whom,” is one I’ve written about

here a number of times. In short, use “whom” whenever you’re

referring to the object of an action. Use “who” for the person

performing the action. “Who is going to inundate whom with angry

letters?” Why, readers are going to inundate me with them, of course.

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

[email protected].