Nominative "than them"

[Septimus G. Stevens, VII]

Consider a sentence like:
Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.

Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"?
I suppose "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a citation
to demonstrate that?

I did find, FWIW
http://archive.org/stream/jstor-287961/287961_djvu.txt
"The accusative after than is pronounced to be now so universal as to be
considered the normal construction ..."

Thanks for any help.
Septimus

[Curlytop]

Septimus G. Stevens, VII set the following eddies spiralling through the
space-time continuum:

> Consider a sentence like:
> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
>
> Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"?
> I suppose "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
> much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a citation
> to demonstrate that?

"Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the same case
before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called for so "than they"
is correct here.
--
ξ: ) Proud to be curly

Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply

[Pierre Jelenc]

In article <kpq9s4$6gg$1...@dont-email.me>,

Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>"Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the same case
>before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called for so "than they"
>is correct here.

Which merely goes to show that "them" is an alternative form of the
nominative --except in the more stilted, formal varieties of English.

Don't ye think so?

Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <kpq9s4$6gg$1...@dont-email.me>,
Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Septimus G. Stevens, VII set the following eddies spiralling through the
> space-time continuum:
>
> > Consider a sentence like:
> > Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
> >
> > Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"?

If you're writing something that an elitist pedant might read, then
write "than they" or better, "than they have", because they will will
likely judge you and "correct" you.

If you're just speaking with ordinary humans, then use "than them",
because that's how we actually talk to each other.

> > I suppose "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
> > much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a citation
> > to demonstrate that?
>
> "Than" is not a preposition,

Sometimes it is:

2than preposition
Definition of THAN

: in comparison with <you are older than me>

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/than>

> it's a conjunction,

If it were only ever a conjunction and never a preposition, you
wouldn't be able to use single-word extraction when forming a
wh-question:

-conjunctions (extraction not possible)

She has seen you and him together.
*Who has she seen you and _ together?

She will leave if he does.
*Who will she leave if _ does?

She will leave when he does.
*Who will she leave when _ does?

She will leave before he does.
*Who will she leave before _ does?

She has been acting like he always does.
*Who has she been acting like _ always does?

She is taller than he is.
*Who is she taller than _ is?

-prepositions (extraction possible)

She has looked at him.
Who has she looked at _?

She has spoken to him.
Who has she spoken to _?

She has spoken of him.
Who has she spoken of _?

She will leave before him.
Who will she leave before _?

She has been acting like him.
Who has she been acting like?

She is taller than him.
Who is she taller than _?

As is the case with "before" and "like", "than" can be used as either
a conjunction or a preposition. This is a fact about ordinary native
speakers usage.

Nathan

--
Department of Linguistics
Swarthmore College
http://sanders.phonologist.org/

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> writes:

> Septimus G. Stevens, VII set the following eddies spiralling through the
> space-time continuum:
>
>> Consider a sentence like:
>> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
>>
>> Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"? I suppose
>> "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
>> much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a
>> citation to demonstrate that?
>
> "Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the
> same case before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called
> for so "than they" is correct here.

Run that by me again? The phrase in question is "with bigger muscles
than <X>". If it's a conjunction and <X> needs to be in the same case
as what goes before, that would be the case of "muscles", which, being
a prepositional object is accusative. So "them".

My own analysis would be that "than", in this sentence is, indeed a
preposition, and the correct form is "theirs", elliptical for "their
[i.e., the bakers'] muscles".

You'd be on more solid ground if the sentence had been

Bakers are envious of any men WHO HAVE larger muscles than them.

which can be argued to be better as

Bakers are envious of any men who have larger muscles than they do.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |To express oneself
SF Bay Area (1982-) |In seventeen syllables
Chicago (1964-1982) |Is very diffic
| Tony Finch
evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Eric Walker]

Considered by whom?

If you are uncomfortable with--

Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than they.

--which is not unreasonable, because it sounds like a reference to
muscles larger than a man, then simply complete the ellipsis:

Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than they have.

Then everybody is happy.

--
Cordially,
Eric Walker

[Eric Walker]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:50:51 +0000, Pierre Jelenc wrote:

[...]

> Which merely goes to show that "them" is an alternative form of the
> nominative --except in the more stilted, formal varieties of English.
>
> Don't ye think so?

No.


--
Cordially,
Eric Walker

[Stan Brown]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:44:11 +0000 (UTC), Septimus G. Stevens, VII
wrote:
>

> Consider a sentence like:
> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
>
> Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"?

Not in this sentence. It is better to say "than theirs".



--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <kpr31j$4av$1...@dont-email.me>,

Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:

> then simply complete the ellipsis:
>
> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than they have.

But it's not complete. Since "have" is an obligatorily transitive
verb, "they have" is still elliptical. The full, complete sentence,
filling in the obligatory object of "have" so that there is no
remaining ellipsis, would be:

*Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles
than they have muscles.

But this isn't grammatical. That's the major problem with trying to
analyze comparative structures as elliptical. When you fill out the
*full* ellipsis for some of them, it just doesn't work syntactically,
and in some cases, not even semantically. Linguists have known this
for quite a while.

[CDB]

On 19/06/2013 12:57 AM, Nathan Sanders wrote:
> Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:

>> then simply complete the ellipsis:

>> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than they have.

> But it's not complete. Since "have" is an obligatorily transitive
> verb, "they have" is still elliptical. The full, complete sentence,
> filling in the obligatory object of "have" so that there is no
> remaining ellipsis, would be:

> *Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles
> than they have muscles.

> But this isn't grammatical. That's the major problem with trying to
> analyze comparative structures as elliptical. When you fill out the
> *full* ellipsis for some of them, it just doesn't work syntactically,
> and in some cases, not even semantically. Linguists have known this
> for quite a while.

Than theirs? Where case-forms cease from troubling.

[Pierre Jelenc]

In article <kpr32k$4av$2...@dont-email.me>,

Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:50:51 +0000, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> Which merely goes to show that "them" is an alternative form of the
>> nominative --except in the more stilted, formal varieties of English.
>>
>> Don't ye think so?
>
>No.

Do you use "ye" in your everyday language, then? Because "you" is the
accusative, by your definition. It merely has gone a bit further than "me"
or "them", but it's the same phenomenon: in colloquial English, the
nominative of personal pronouns has two forms, one of which is identical
to the accusative and is used in inversions, for emphasis, with
conjunctions, etc. In the case of "you", it has already taken over.

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <kps0ni$5fl$2...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Sure, that works in this specific example, but not for comparatives in
general: "bakers are envious of any men with more money than...".

[abc]

Pierre Jelenc wrote:
> In article <kpq9s4$6gg$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the same case
>> before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called for so "than they"
>> is correct here.
>
> Which merely goes to show that "them" is an alternative form of the
> nominative --except in the more stilted, formal varieties of English.
>
> Don't ye think so?

Not really. It can also be explained as an alternative use of "than", as
a preposition rather than a conjunction.
abc

[abc]

Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> writes:
>
>> Septimus G. Stevens, VII set the following eddies spiralling through the
>> space-time continuum:
>>
>>> Consider a sentence like:
>>> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
>>>
>>> Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"? I suppose
>>> "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
>>> much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a
>>> citation to demonstrate that?
>>
>> "Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the
>> same case before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called
>> for so "than they" is correct here.
>
> Run that by me again? The phrase in question is "with bigger muscles
> than <X>". If it's a conjunction and <X> needs to be in the same case

Your "the phrase" lacks both a subject and a predicative and so is not a
phrase at all. The phrase in question is "Bakers are ..." and the
agreement would have been with the subject of that phrase.

> as what goes before, that would be the case of "muscles", which, being
> a prepositional object is accusative. So "them".

> My own analysis would be that "than", in this sentence is, indeed a
> preposition, and the correct form is "theirs", elliptical for "their
> [i.e., the bakers'] muscles".

Agreed that it's being used as a preposition. And if so, "them" is
valid. "theirs" is _another_ correct form, not _the_ correct form.

abc

[Eric Walker]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:53:49 +0000, Pierre Jelenc wrote:

> In article <kpr32k$4av$2...@dont-email.me>, Eric Walker
> <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:50:51 +0000, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>> Which merely goes to show that "them" is an alternative form of the
>>> nominative --except in the more stilted, formal varieties of English.
>>>
>>> Don't ye think so?
>>
>>No.
>
> Do you use "ye" in your everyday language, then? Because "you" is the
> accusative, by your definition. It merely has gone a bit further than
> "me" or "them", but it's the same phenomenon: in colloquial English, the
> nominative of personal pronouns has two forms, one of which is identical
> to the accusative and is used in inversions, for emphasis, with
> conjunctions, etc. In the case of "you", it has already taken over.

I sense some confusion there. That one form can do for two does not
infallibly imply that two can do for one.

It would, of course, be nice to restore a distinctive second-person
number distinction, and there are many informal candidates, no one of
which has ever really caught on.


--
Cordially,
Eric Walker

[Eric Walker]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:21:38 -0400, CDB wrote:

> On 19/06/2013 12:57 AM, Nathan Sanders wrote:

[...]

>> But it's not complete. Since "have" is an obligatorily transitive
>> verb, "they have" is still elliptical. The full, complete sentence,
>> filling in the obligatory object of "have" so that there is no
>> remaining ellipsis, would be:
>
>> *Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles
>> than they have muscles.
>

>> But this isn't grammatical. . . .

It helps to use the correct form rather than set up a straw man.

Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than [the muscles]
they have.

I am also unclear about what is wrong even with the unlikely form
proposed. "I have more dollars than he has dollars" is awkward and thus
infelicitous, but what about it is actually defective?

But in any event, as others have said, using "theirs" is the best form.


--
Cordially,
Eric Walker

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <kpt6kp$tj2$2...@dont-email.me>,

Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:21:38 -0400, CDB wrote:
>
> > On 19/06/2013 12:57 AM, Nathan Sanders wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> But it's not complete. Since "have" is an obligatorily transitive
> >> verb, "they have" is still elliptical. The full, complete sentence,
> >> filling in the obligatory object of "have" so that there is no
> >> remaining ellipsis, would be:
> >
> >> *Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles
> >> than they have muscles.
> >
> >> But this isn't grammatical. . . .
>
> It helps to use the correct form rather than set up a straw man.

Then you have to eschew "have" altogether. Ellipsis is the absence of
*matching* lexical content. Here, the only relevant lexical content
is "with" and "muscles". There is no "have" in the original sentence
that could have been elided.

The real de-elided form needs to be something like:

Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles

than their muscles.

But there's no way to elide that version (or your proposed "...with
larger muscles than the muscles they have") to get to the original
sentence that was asked about:

Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles

than they/them.

Ellipsis only lets you delete matching lexical content. It doesn't
let you change "their" to "they" or "them" (and it definitely doesn't
let you delete "have").

> But in any event, as others have said, using "theirs" is the best form.

And as I have said, while this solves the case issue here, it won't
work for comparatives in general.

[Robert Bannister]

...sense?

--
Robert Bannister

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

abc <a...@abc.def.gh> writes:

> Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> Curlytop <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> writes:
>>
>>> Septimus G. Stevens, VII set the following eddies spiralling through the
>>> space-time continuum:
>>>
>>>> Consider a sentence like:
>>>> Bakers are envious of any men with larger muscles than them.
>>>>
>>>> Is it better to write or say "than they" or "than them"? I suppose
>>>> "than they" might be proper in traditional grammar, but it seems
>>>> much less idiomatic. If "than them" is now preferred, is there a
>>>> citation to demonstrate that?
>>>
>>> "Than" is not a preposition, it's a conjunction, so it takes the
>>> same case before and after. Clearly the nominative case is called
>>> for so "than they" is correct here.
>>
>> Run that by me again? The phrase in question is "with bigger muscles
>> than <X>". If it's a conjunction and <X> needs to be in the same case
>
> Your "the phrase" lacks both a subject and a predicative and so is not
> a phrase at all.

So for you a sequence of words needs to be a clause in order to be a
"phrase"? Interesting. How do you understand "prepositional phrase",
e.g., "to the boy", "under the tree", or "with larger muscles than
theirs"? Similarly, noun phrases, verb phrase, adjectival phrases, or
adverbial phrases.

> The phrase in question is "Bakers are ..."

That's a sentence

> and the agreement would have been with the subject of that phrase.

I can't even begin to wrap my head around that. If "than" is
coordinating with "Bakers are envious", then the thing on the other
side would have to be envious of something. I think.

>> as what goes before, that would be the case of "muscles", which, being
>> a prepositional object is accusative. So "them".
>
>> My own analysis would be that "than", in this sentence is, indeed a
>> preposition, and the correct form is "theirs", elliptical for "their
>> [i.e., the bakers'] muscles".
>
> Agreed that it's being used as a preposition. And if so, "them" is
> valid.

Especially if it the envied people have muscles large than the
bakers themselves. (Not the bakers' muscles; the bakers.)

> "theirs" is _another_ correct form, not _the_ correct form.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If the human brain were so simple
SF Bay Area (1982-) |That we could understand it,
Chicago (1964-1982) |We would be so simple
|That we couldn't.
evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Pierre Jelenc]

In article <kpt6bp$tj2$1...@dont-email.me>,

Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:53:49 +0000, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>
>> Do you use "ye" in your everyday language, then? Because "you" is the
>> accusative, by your definition. It merely has gone a bit further than
>> "me" or "them", but it's the same phenomenon: in colloquial English, the
>> nominative of personal pronouns has two forms, one of which is identical
>> to the accusative and is used in inversions, for emphasis, with
>> conjunctions, etc. In the case of "you", it has already taken over.
>
>I sense some confusion there. That one form can do for two does not
>infallibly imply that two can do for one.

Of course it can: the speech patterns (both oral and written) of millions
of native English speakers (and Swedish speakers, and French speakers just
to stay with those languages I'm most familiar with) prove it. That this
question pops up with such frequency is proof enough that native speakers
have spoken. So to say...