Another one of my own personal mysteries of life answered by the intertubes!

[280plus]

Yay!

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-whom.aspx

Like whom, the pronoun him ends with m. When you're trying to decide whether to use who or whom, ask yourself if the answer to the question would be he or him. That's the trick: if you can answer the question being asked with him, then use whom, and it's easy to remember because they both end with m. For example, if you're trying to ask, "Who (or whom) do you love?" The answer would be "I love him." Him ends with an m, so you know to use whom. But if you are trying to ask, "Who (or whom) stepped on Squiggly?" the answer would be "He stepped on Squiggly." There's no m, so you know to use who. So that's the quick and dirty trick: if you can't remember that you use whom when you are referring to the object of the sentence, just remember that him equals whom

[makattak]

Yay!

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-whom.aspx

Who is nominative, whom is objective.

It's a remnant from the time that English still had declensions. Like: I, me, my, mine or He him his.

[280plus]

Try as I could I could not wrap my mind around that whole objective subjective thing. Maybe in simple sentences but in big ones with lots o' words, nope, couldn't get it. The TRICK however I instantly understood. It's like I got a little Yogi Berra in me. But not, I repeat, not, in a homosexual innuendo sort of way.  Just sayin'

[Hawkmoon]

Try as I could I could not wrap my mind around that whole objective subjective thing. Maybe in simple sentences but in big ones with lots o' words, nope, couldn't get it. The TRICK however I instantly understood. It's like I got a little Yogi Berra in me. But not, I repeat, not, in a homosexual innuendo sort of way.  Just sayin'

Thanks for clarifying ...

[Matthew Carberry]

Try as I could I could not wrap my mind around that whole objective subjective thing. Maybe in simple sentences but in big ones with lots o' words, nope, couldn't get it. The TRICK however I instantly understood. It's like I got a little Yogi Berra in me. But not, I repeat, not, in a homosexual innuendo sort of way.  Just sayin'

If not Yogi Berra, whom do you have a little bit in you of?

[280plus]

Ever read "Ball Four"? TYhere's a part in there about I THINK Yogi being the one who used to walk down the buffet table in the locker room after a game all nekkid and dragging his privates over the cold cuts.

[BlueStarLizzard]

Great. Now that I know the rule of "whom" i'll never be able to use it right again.
 

Come on guys!  My grammer sucks bad enough to begin with!
 

[S. Williamson]

If not Yogi Berra, whom do you have a little bit in you of?

^^^ The verbal/written form of this device:


http://images.wikia.com/firefly/images/4/48/Blue_hand_1.jpg

 

[280plus]

[chicken voice from that chicken pot pie movie] Noooo, I don't want a blue hand in me!" [/chicken voice from that chicken pot pie movie]  

or anything else for that matter 

 

[230RN]

Pnemonics

"Him, whom, he, who, hoo-hah!"

^ From me Sainted and Blessed Mither, who used to wipe me liddle ass.

"There is A RAT in 'sepARATe.'"

"There is an EEE! in 'cEmEtEry.'"

"Gauge is spelled alphabetically."  (A comes before U.)

^ Also from me Sainted and Blessed Mither.

Who used to wipe me liddle ass.


"Terr-ENCE!  How dare you talk like that!"

Yeah.  Also from me Sainted and Blessed Mither.

Terry, 230RN

[280plus]

For a minute there I thought the whole thing was a poem. It all finally registered for me though. 

[Lee]

While we're on the subject of words and grammar...is there a term for word meanings or usages that change with different generations.  One recent example I've noticed is - "Really?"...as in "are you serious?" In the 70's we said "Really" as in "I totally agree".  Another is "ridiculous", as in amazing or outstanding, and not ridiculous. We used to say, don't EVEN think about it...with the emphasis on EVEN.  I guess every generation has their slang words such as groovy, hip, hep, cool,etc...but the examples I listed above are different...why...and is there a name for that? 

[230RN]

...why...and is there a name for that? 

"Change," "Evolution of language."

Same things happen with spellings: "gonne," "gun," for example.  The Biblical "spake" versus "spoke," as a sample of a wealth of changes since King James' time.

Of late, however, there has indeed been an explosion of corruptions simply because of the explosion of communications.  I suspect a lot of the gratuitous changes are because some person wanted to make an impact, however slight, so s/he changes the meaning. The Valley Girls of the last century are prominent examples.

Poor self-esteem makes them inventify new wordilations.

Kay?

Terry, 230RN

[230RN]

Afterthought:

I have a tendency to remember those "pnemonics" that I was taught by me Sainted and Blessed Mither only when I need them, and I can't bring them up just "out of the blue." 

Another one I remember now is, "Its is its own possessive and doesn't need an apostrophe."

[280plus]

A lot of that is someone expresses something in a new way, everybody thinks it's cool and they begin to use it themselves. Sometimes they spread like wildfire, mostly due to the media picking it up somehow, or they remain localized. "Catch word" or "catch phrase" is possibly one way to describe them.

"YABADABADOOOO!!" is Fred Flintstone's "catch word" nuless "YABADABADOOOO!!" is a phrase, then it would be a catch phrase.

"Well, EXCUSE ME!!" is a Steve Martin catch phrase.

It seems to me that as soon as the media picks up and uses a catch phrase that's been going around it usually spells the end of the usage. The media always seems to remain one step behind whatever is cool at the moment. Just about the time they get to it, it's over. 

[makattak]

"Change," "Evolution of language."

Same things happen with spellings: "gonne," "gun," for example.  The Biblical "spake" versus "spoke," as a sample of a wealth of changes since King James' time.

Of late, however, there has indeed been an explosion of corruptions simply because of the explosion of communications.  I suspect a lot of the gratuitous changes are because some person wanted to make an impact, however slight, so s/he changes the meaning. The Valley Girls of the last century are prominent examples.

Poor self-esteem makes them inventify new wordilations.

Kay?

Terry, 230RN

You know what one really bothers me for some reason?

Pleaded. Comes on the news all the time, "He pleaded guilty to XXXXXX", "She pleaded not guilty in XXXX".

Pled. We have a perfectly good word that is being lost because some idiots can't conjugate a word without adding -ed to it.

He pled guilty. She pled not guilty. He pled for his life.

Pled. Not pleaded. Pled.

[TommyGunn]

You know what one really bothers me for some reason?

Pleaded. Comes on the news all the time, "He pleaded guilty to XXXXXX", "She pleaded not guilty in XXXX".

Pled. We have a perfectly good word that is being lost because some idiots can't conjugate a word without adding -ed to it.

He pled guilty. She pled not guilty. He pled for his life.

Pled. Not pleaded. Pled.

It was my understanding that "pleaded" was actually the proper form and there was actually no such word as "pled,"  but having checked my dictionary, apparantly both are proper.
 

Oh well.

[roo_ster]

Who--whom? (Lenin style)

It's a simple case of "Who -- Whom?" A classic as explained here from when Time was a magazine and not a lump of irrelevant woodpulp:

   Marxism was posited on the ideas of a single absolute truth, the predestined victory of the cause, and the fallibility and expendability of the individual. Therefore it lent itself to the suppression of dissenters and the extermination of opponents. Lenin, with his knack for hortatory pungency, reduced the past and future alike to two pronouns and a question mark: "Who—whom?" No verb was necessary. It meant who would prevail over whom? And the question was largely rhetorical, implying that the answer was never in doubt. Lenin and those who followed him would prevail over "them," whoever they were. -- The Specter and the Struggle - TIME -- Jan. 04, 1982

"Who—whom?" Who shall be forced to give up the health care that they like (most Americans), and whom shall receive health care they (supposedly) ain't got -- for free -- at a cost to everyone else of trillions in dollars and immeasurable quantities of freedom and privacy and security.

[Perd Hapley]

http://sbmblog.typepad.com/sbm-blog/2010/11/michigans-take-on-the-pleaded-vs-pled-controversy.html

I’ve generally found that most younger attorneys use “pled” while the more senior attorneys prefer “pleaded.”

http://www.cjr.org/resources/lc/pleadguilty.php


http://www.copyediting.com/wordpress/?p=497

[Doggy Daddy]

Another one I remember now is, "Its is its own possessive and doesn't need an apostrophe."

What works for me on that one is "It's a good place to put an apostrophe."

DD

[230RN]

^ Very good.  :)

"Lie" and "lay" bother me a little, but it's so common I just read right past it, like a lot of common errors.

A new one I dislike is "moar" for "more."  A pointless affectation, but someday someone on the futurenet will be correcting someone else for mispelling it as "more" instead of "moar."

Like "rifle" for "gun" and "clip" for "magazine."  All was well, and well understood, when we used "clip" and "gun" until some sadistic Drill Instructor pounded the crap out of some poor recruit for using the words "inappropriately" and it propagated from there as if it were Biblical Writ or something.*

Langwidj is funy stuf.

Terry, 230RN

* A purely hypothetical story.  Knock me not for thinking it up. And someone's sure to post the clip of R. Lee Ermy parading his platoon through the barracks in their skivvies giving the usual chant about rifles and guns.

[Tallpine]

While we're on the subject of words and grammar...is there a term for word meanings or usages that change with different generations.  One recent example I've noticed is - "Really?"...as in "are you serious?" In the 70's we said "Really" as in "I totally agree".  Another is "ridiculous", as in amazing or outstanding, and not ridiculous. We used to say, don't EVEN think about it...with the emphasis on EVEN.  I guess every generation has their slang words such as groovy, hip, hep, cool,etc...but the examples I listed above are different...why...and is there a name for that? 

Not really.

[S. Williamson]

You know what one really bothers me for some reason?

Pleaded. Comes on the news all the time, "He pleaded guilty to XXXXXX", "She pleaded not guilty in XXXX".

Pled. We have a perfectly good word that is being lost because some idiots can't conjugate a word without adding -ed to it.

He pled guilty. She pled not guilty. He pled for his life.

Pled. Not pleaded. Pled.

I once got extra credit on an essay for English Comp back in my freshman year of college for correctly using the word "strove" (past tense of "strive"). 

[280plus]

strive-strove-striven... 

[230RN]

drive-drove-driven

But dive-dove-diven?

I had diven into the river...

Hm.