Jim and me vs. Me and Jim

[Frederick Williams]

Am I right in thinking that the preference for

Jim and me

over

Me and Jim

is a matter of politeness not grammar?

--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting

[Don Phillipson]

"Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...

> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
> Jim and me
>
> over
>
> Me and Jim
>
> is a matter of politeness not grammar?

Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
"Jim and me" is not a sentence.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2013-03-25 17:50:03 +0100, Frederick Williams

<freddyw...@btinternet.com> said:

> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
> Jim and me
>
> over
>
> Me and Jim
>
> is a matter of politeness not grammar?

That is what I've always thought.

The second form is of course very common in speech, especially of
children, and what is grammatically interesting is that in my
experience they always say "Me and Jim went to play football today",
rather than "I and Jim went to play football today" -- I don't think
I've ever heard this latter form.


--
athel

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <kiq0j1$5ov$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Don Phillipson <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:

>Grammar can be applied only to sentences.

Nonsense.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993

[Jerry Friedman]

On Mar 25, 10:50 am, Frederick Williams

<freddywilli...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
>   Jim and me
>
> over
>
>   Me and Jim
>
> is a matter of politeness not grammar?

Absolutely.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Don Phillipson]

>>Grammar can be applied only to sentences.

"Garrett Wollman" <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote in message
news:kiq0v3$568$1...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu...

> Nonsense.

Evidence?

[Frederick Williams]

Don Phillipson wrote:
>
> "Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...
>
> > Am I right in thinking that the preference for
> >
> > Jim and me
> >
> > over
> >
> > Me and Jim
> >
> > is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>
> Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
> "Jim and me" is not a sentence.

Who's visiting granny today?
Jim and me.

Who's visiting granny today?
Me and Jim.

They may be only fragments of sentences, but why should rules of grammar
not apply?

[BCD]

On 3/25/2013 1:49 PM, Frederick Williams wrote:
> Don Phillipson wrote:
>>
>> "Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...
>>
>>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>>
>>> Jim and me
>>>
>>> over
>>>
>>> Me and Jim
>>>
>>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>>
>> Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
>> "Jim and me" is not a sentence.
>
> Who's visiting granny today?
> Jim and me.
>
> Who's visiting granny today?
> Me and Jim.
>
> They may be only fragments of sentences, but why should rules of grammar
> not apply?

***Indeed.

***Meantime, shouldn't the answer to the stated question be "Jim and I
[are]" (or, conceivably, "I and Jim [are]")?

***"Jim and me" (or, conceivably, "Me and Jim") would be the answer to
"Whom did granny order to leave the moment they came through the door?"

Best Wishes,

--BCD

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <kiqch4$afs$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Don Phillipson <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>>Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
>
>"Garrett Wollman" <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote in message
>news:kiq0v3$568$1...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu...
>
>> Nonsense.
>
>Evidence?

The grammar of English has many non-terminal productions -- e.g.,
anything described as a kind of "phrase". It is useful and at times
necessary to consider whether a particular string matches (belongs to
the set of strings matched by) a particular non-terminal. For
example, "the big red dog" is an English noun phrase, whereas "dog red
big the" is not.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2013-03-25 17:04:08 +0000, Don Phillipson said:

> "Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...
>
>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>
>> Jim and me
>>
>> over
>>
>> Me and Jim
>>
>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>
> Grammar can be applied only to sentences.

I don't agree, but I don't need to say more, because Garrett has
already responded.

> "Jim and me" is not a sentence.


--

athel

[Frederick Williams]

BCD wrote:
>
> On 3/25/2013 1:49 PM, Frederick Williams wrote:
> > Don Phillipson wrote:
> >>
> >> "Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> >> news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...
> >>
> >>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
> >>>
> >>> Jim and me
> >>>
> >>> over
> >>>
> >>> Me and Jim
> >>>
> >>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
> >>
> >> Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
> >> "Jim and me" is not a sentence.
> >
> > Who's visiting granny today?
> > Jim and me.
> >
> > Who's visiting granny today?
> > Me and Jim.
> >
> > They may be only fragments of sentences, but why should rules of grammar
> > not apply?
>
> ***Indeed.
>
> ***Meantime, shouldn't the answer to the stated question be "Jim and I
> [are]" (or, conceivably, "I and Jim [are]")?

Yes! That's exactly my point: you cannot correct the grammar of "Jim
and me." (or "Me and Jim.") unless the rules of grammar are applicable.

> ***"Jim and me" (or, conceivably, "Me and Jim") would be the answer to
> "Whom did granny order to leave the moment they came through the door?"
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> --BCD

[Stan Brown]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:50:03 +0000, Frederick Williams wrote:
>
> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
> Jim and me
>
> over
>
> Me and Jim
>
> is a matter of politeness not grammar?

Context?

"Jim and me are going" and "Me and Jim are going" are equally wrong,
to the tune of 100%.

--
"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

[Robert Bannister]

On 26/03/13 4:49 AM, Frederick Williams wrote:
> Don Phillipson wrote:
>>
>> "Frederick Williams" <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:5150803B...@btinternet.com...
>>
>>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>>
>>> Jim and me
>>>
>>> over
>>>
>>> Me and Jim
>>>
>>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>>
>> Grammar can be applied only to sentences.
>> "Jim and me" is not a sentence.
>
> Who's visiting granny today?
> Jim and me.
>
> Who's visiting granny today?
> Me and Jim.
>
> They may be only fragments of sentences, but why should rules of grammar
> not apply?
>

If we applied the rules, we would end up with "Jim and I", and I presume
that is not what we are aiming for.

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

I can remember writing "I and my friends decided to..." or something
like that in one of those accursed "What did you do over the holidays"
essays and being corrected. Unlike young people today, this did not lead
me into the common "for you and I" kind of error. In fact, I don't we
stopped saying "Me and my friends" for quite a long time. We just learnt
not to write it.

So you are correct: "I and X" was not said because we always used "Me
and X", but when being correct, it seemed reasonable to write "I and X"
until the teacher explained it with her ruler.

--
Robert Bannister

[Jennifer Murphy]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:50:03 +0000, Frederick Williams

<freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
> Jim and me
>
>over
>
> Me and Jim
>
>is a matter of politeness not grammar?

That is what I have always believed, but I have nothing to back it up.

If I ever said something like, "Mom, can you take me and Sally to the
park?", I would get one of those looks until I fixed the request.

If you want to get an answer to the question you actually asked, you
will have to word it very carefully. If there is any remotely possible
way to misunderstand your question, even if any normal human being would
understand exactly what you were asking, this group will pounce on the
opportunity and take the thread off in some (or several) irrelevant
direction(s).

[Walter P. Zähl]

Jennifer Murphy <JenM...@jm.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:50:03 +0000, Frederick Williams
> <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>
>> Jim and me
>>
>> over
>>
>> Me and Jim
>>
>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>
> That is what I have always believed, but I have nothing to back it up.
>
> If I ever said something like, "Mom, can you take me and Sally to the
> park?", I would get one of those looks until I fixed the request.
>

It's the same in German: "ich und Jim" is "wrong", the accepted version is
"Jim und ich".
I remember receiving (and passing on to my children) those same looks.

Since in German we don't have the "I vs. me" issue, I think it must be a
question of politeness, nor grammar.

/Walter

[jgharston]

Jennifer Murphy wrote:
> If I ever said something like, "Mom, can you take me and Sally to the
> park?", I would get one of those looks until I fixed the request.

There's nothing wrong with that request that needs fixing.

The only difference is of emphasis. Do you want to say: can you take
me, oh and take Sally as well; or do you want to say: can you take
Sally, oh and take me as well.

JGH

[Jennifer Murphy]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 04:04:23 -0700 (PDT), jgharston <j...@mdfs.net>
wrote:

I would never infer emphasis solely on the order. It would require
intonation or some other non-verbal cue. Lacking that, I think most
people in most mainstream circles would have a negative reaction to "me
and Sally". I would not use that form.

[Mike L]

On 26 Mar 2013 07:12:40 GMT, Walter P. Z�hl <spams...@zaehl.de>
wrote:

And there are languages in which the first person is placed first, so
I think it's very much a matter of etiquette.

--
Mike.

[Robert Bannister]

At least in German you don't get idiots saying "für dich und ich"
although I have a Berlin friend who until he was almost in his 50s
persisted in confusing "mir" and "mich".

--
Robert Bannister

[Peter Moylan]

On 26/03/13 03:50, Frederick Williams wrote:
> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>
> Jim and me
>
> over
>
> Me and Jim
>
> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>

Yes, but there are two separate questions here. The choice between those
two forms is indeed a matter of politeness. On the other hand, the
choice between "Jim and me" and "Jim and I" is definitely a question of
grammar. (But we can't, of course, answer that question unless we know
whether the phrase is to be used as a subject or as an object.)

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

[Peter Moylan]

On 26/03/13 11:13, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:50:03 +0000, Frederick Williams wrote:
>>
>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>
>> Jim and me
>>
>> over
>>
>> Me and Jim
>>
>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>
> Context?
>
> "Jim and me are going" and "Me and Jim are going" are equally wrong,
> to the tune of 100%.
>

True; but I think we can assume that the OP already knows this. The
alternatives presented obviously imply that we're talking about the
object form.

[Robert Bannister]

On 28/03/13 10:59 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 26/03/13 03:50, Frederick Williams wrote:
>> Am I right in thinking that the preference for
>>
>> Jim and me
>>
>> over
>>
>> Me and Jim
>>
>> is a matter of politeness not grammar?
>>
> Yes, but there are two separate questions here. The choice between those
> two forms is indeed a matter of politeness. On the other hand, the
> choice between "Jim and me" and "Jim and I" is definitely a question of
> grammar. (But we can't, of course, answer that question unless we know
> whether the phrase is to be used as a subject or as an object.)
>

Moreover, for those who do say "Me and Jim are going" - and when I was
about seven, that is the only way I would have expressed it - it is
almost always "me" first. In fact, I would suggest that "me and X" was
internalised as a special phrase similarly to the way that today's youth
(including every journalist) has clearly internalised "X and I" as a set
phrase.

Me circa 1947: "Me and Jim want to go to the pictures, Mum."

Youngish person today: "What's in it for you and I?"
--
Robert Bannister