Raising a Middle Finger to Language Snobbery
(8-minute read)
Before we begin, let’s get something straight. Which of the following sentences is correct?
A) Come to the shops with me and Wilf!
B) Come to the shops with Wilf and I!
C) Wilf and I are going to the shops.
D) Me and Wilf are going to the shops.
If you favour a descriptive approach, you might argue that they’re all correct, because they’re all in common use and easily understood.
If you prefer a prescriptive approach, you’d argue that only A and C are correct.
Prescriptive grammar has only one correct or acceptable form which is understood to be the way a language should be used (although even this acceptable form is paradoxically susceptible to change). This approach requires a ‘standard’ form of English. Descriptive grammar, on the other hand, sees whatever grammar is being used and understood in practice at the time to be correct (communication is, after all, the purpose of language). Head to my earlier blog post for a deeper understanding of this divide.
So that we’re all on the same page, let’s ensure we understand what the correct use of ‘you and I’ and ‘you and me’ look like by prescriptive standards.
In grammatical terms, I is a subject pronoun, and me is an object pronoun. That means you would use I to express that you yourself are performing an action and me to indicate you are receiving an action, no matter who else you’re performing or receiving the action with. Since Modern English mostly uses subject-verb-object sentence construction, you’ll usually find you and I at the beginning of a sentence, and you and me towards the end.
If you’re ever unsure and want to get it ‘right’, try removing the people who aren’t you from the sentence (so “Come to the shops with me and Wilf!” would become “Come to the shops with me!” whilst “Come to the shops with Wilf and I!” would become “Come to the shops with I!”). This way, you might be able to deduce which is correct intuitively. Alternatively, try replacing you and I with we and you and me with us (“Wilf and I [we] are going to the shops. Come to the shops with me and Wilf [us]”).
Sidenote: sometimes, speakers use the reflexive pronoun myself in the subject position. However, using myself instead of I is also grammatically incorrect by prescriptive standards.
But language is naturally descriptive in practice, and you and me has fallen into common use no matter where it falls in a sentence. More recently, a countertendency to use you and I across the board has arisen, swinging the pendulum the other way. Having heard that you and I is correct (which it is as the subject), people mistakenly use it in the object position as well. This is called hypercorrection and is often a result of speakers wanting to sound educated, intelligent, or polite.
I didn’t know until recently that you and me can be considered impolite. In a conversation with a friend, this was the justification for hypercorrecting my grammar (from “Wanna come with me and Nick?” to “Wanna come with Nick and I?”) – politeness!
We use language to send messages, but sometimes we end up inadvertently sending unintentional messages when our recipients interpret the words we choose through a different lens to the one we know. I want to use language as a force for good, so this interpretation of you and me as impolite interested me.
When I Google ‘How to be polite’, the first hit is about language.
To me, good manners are about making people feel comfortable. We practise politeness so as not to irritate, offend, or disturb others (by chewing with our mouths open or interrupting them halfway through their sentence, for example). For this reason, politeness is often interpreted as being synonymous with respect.
But who creates the rules around manners, and why?
With the modern English language’s rich classist history, I began to wonder, how many of these rules are created in the name of genuine respect, and how many are created in the name of undue respect?
Sure, scrolling through Instagram while your friend tells you about a serious (boring) problem they’re having at work? Disrespect implied. But using an object pronoun in place of a subject pronoun? I’m not so sure. Surely this is about education rather than respect?
The correlation between education/class and manners shouldn’t come as a surprise. Historically, using the correct fork or bringing the right wine might have been seen as good manners, but these are based on etiquette rather than politeness. These rituals are less accessible to poorer people, and they aren’t about making people comfortable but about proving one’s ability to participate in them.
Peaceful Mom writes, “The word etiquette comes to us from French. It referred to a physical ticket that was provided to visitors of the royal court giving them a list of rules and regulations for appropriate behavior. […] In time, the etiquets became handheld documents indicating what was allowed and what wasn’t. Unfortunately, if you weren’t in the in-crowd, you wouldn’t gain access to the etiquets. In that way, etiquets served as a barrier to isolate ‘cultured’ people from ‘uncultured’ ones. These rules have trickled down and become what we might today call politeness.”
So, do object pronouns fall in the ‘participating in classist etiquette’ camp or the ‘showing respect for those around you’ camp?
In other languages, there are many rules about politeness and social etiquette, usually based on class or gender. In English, the classism in language etiquette is so entrenched it’s often mistaken for politeness.
Perceived rudeness is often just a difference in cultural approaches. At times, we might consider adopting a new cultural approach if we recognise a person’s good intentions in participating in well-mannered behaviour. Other times, we must pull apart and unlearn certain cultural approaches when we can deduce their lack of good intentions.
Next time I worry about politeness, I’ll consider: who created this rule and why? Was this expectation created in the name of genuine respect and comfort for others, or was it created in the name of undue respect and proving an ability to participate? Then I’ll smile and give language snobbery the middle finger.