0

Many will be familiar already with the technical details of when to use 'I' and 'me' in a sentence.

I hit him, he hit me, etc.

What I'm confused about is cases such as "me and John went to the shops". Or "who went to the shops earlier? Me and John did."

It's often desirable to list one's self first, either to be emphatic about one's own role in what is being said, or to give one time to think about who else was involved.

These appears to be cases where one cannot change the word "me" to "I" without also changing the word order. For example, you can't say "I and John went to the shops", it has to be "John and I went to the shops".

Is this a formally-recognised case in which "me" can be used in place of "I" (that is, when listing a series of names where the speaker is mentioned first in the list), or does it amount to formally "incorrect" usage despite being almost universal in speech?

To be clear for those who insist this has already been answered, I'm not looking for an explanation of the general rules about I and me. In the specific case where one's self is referred to first in the list, the de facto correct formulation is to say "me and John went to the shops", not "I and John went to the shops". I think we can all agree that the former is actually correct in practice, and the latter is incorrect. My question is whether this is recognised formally as an exception to the usual rule about I and me?

Steve
  • 1,366
  • Note the relative frequency in written contexts for *Me and John, I and John, John and me, John and I* (where in speech I personally would almost always use the first of those, but in writing the last one is by far the most common). – FumbleFingers May 09 '21 at 17:57
  • @FumbleFingers, your linked question doesn't appear to be square with the one I'm asking, and the problem with a naive frequency analysis is that there will be an adverse selection of non-interactive/non-conversational English. As I say in my question, the importance of the word order exists when emphatically answering a question put (which is uncommon in writing, compared to passive statements of fact), or as a device to create time to think when listing several individuals (which again is largely irrelevant in pre-drafted writings). – Steve May 09 '21 at 18:32
  • You wouldn't say "Me went to the shops", would you? – Kate Bunting May 10 '21 at 08:12
  • @KateBunting, no, but I would say "me and John went to the shops", and I wouldn't say "I and John went to the shops", hence my question on this. – Steve May 10 '21 at 16:21
  • The rule I go by is "Use the pronoun you would use if the other person were not mentioned." As far as I'm concerned, John and I went is the only correct version. – Kate Bunting May 10 '21 at 16:25
  • @KateBunting, then by implication you are saying there is a fixed order when listing? Since we both agree "I and John went to the shops" is an incorrect and unheard-of formulation, but "me and John went to the shops" is a common and unremarkable formulation? – Steve May 10 '21 at 16:28
  • I and John... is 'correct' but unidiomatic; Me and John is an all-too-common error IMHO. – Kate Bunting May 10 '21 at 18:55
  • @KateBunting, I'm a native speaker (I assume you are too) and I can assure you "I and John" is incorrect - not just unidiomatic, but completely alien. If "Me and John" is incorrect, it must be on the basis of the wrong choice of pronoun as well as the wrong word order, and there must therefore be a word order rule in relation to the use of "I" (which effectively says you cannot - correctly in English - nominate yourself first in a list of names). It's also interesting to consider cases like "me, him, and John went to the shops" - against "I, he, and John went to the shops". (1/2) – Steve May 10 '21 at 19:07
  • There appears to be a specific rule in which the standard accusative variants are used correctly in a nominative capacity when listing more than one subject, and that it is actually incorrect to use the standard nominative variants in these contexts. (2/2) – Steve May 10 '21 at 19:11

0 Answers0