Each other or one another

[C H]

If two people are talking, they are talking to each other (not one
another); three or more, they are talking to one another (not each
other).

Twins help each other; triplets help one another.

Any thoughts about this usage?

C H

[Francis Cameron]

In message <29881-45A...@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net>, C H
<harr...@webtv.net> writes

It's the 'each', which may ultimately derive from the Greek Dual. (I say
'may').

--
Francis Cameron

[Robert Lieblich]

That's pretty much the traditional rule. It's frequently ignored with
impunity. See

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=each+other

http://www.bartleby.com/61/8/E0000800.html

So although there's certainly nothing wrong with following the rule in
your own speech and writing, it's not a good idea to "correct" people
who don't follow it.

--
Bob Lieblich
Mr. Descriptiveness Hisself

[geo...@ankerstein.org]

I have no problem as long as you realize that it is your own,
unique-to-you rule.

GFH

[Robert Lieblich]

It is not unique to the OP.[1] Earlier on this thread I posted URLs
for two dictionary entries pointing out that this "rule" on "each
other" vs. "one another" is followed by plenty of writers (including a
majority of the AHD usage panel, if memory is correct).

Many people follow rules that make no sense. There are no doubt
millions who avoid split infinitives, sentence-ending prepositions,
singular they, and a variety of other usages disfavored by the
ignorant and the naive. There's no stopping them.

So it is hardly fair to say that the rule under discussion is unique
to the original poster. I agree that there's no problem if the OP
follows it, though I did caution against trying to impose it on
others. I have no problem with anyone else who follows it, subject to
the same caution. Gee, what I nice guy I am!

[1] Was the comment intended as hyperbole? It sure didn't read that
way. Maybe my irony detector is rusty.

--
Bob Lieblich
And a patriotic American to boot

[Flying Tortoise]

Robert Lieblich wrote:

It's not a bad rule at all as it happens. With two people engaged in a
conversation they must by definition be speaking to _each_ (and every)
other person present. With three it's likely but by no means inevitable
that each participant will speak to each other person present. As the
number increase it becomes far less likely that any participant will in
fact be speaking to each other person present. Thus the alternative
'one another' which makes no commitment to how many participants are
speaking to any particular number of others becomes by far the most
logical usage.

Each clearly is not based on duality - I anticipate no difficulty in
giving each of my seven nephews a call on each of their birthdays this
year. It is, however, inclusive and references all the members of any
particular set to which it is applied.