When did "who" and "among" disappear...

a_sharp · Nov 6, 2007

...from the English language?

"The boy ~~that~~ who loved me."

"I couldn't choose ~~between~~ among the three of them."

I see these uses all over the place, including AW posts, and I wonder if anyone was paying attention in English 1A. For me they're real show-stoppers, just toss me right out of the read. Am I being too picky or did I just miss the bus?

Voyager · Nov 6, 2007

Blame ms word's spellcheck for the former. Unless the subject is a proper noun, it often gives the dreaded green squiggly o'death for who and whom.

Siddow · Nov 6, 2007

I don't know what you're talking about. Perhaps these are your pet words, so you notice the misuse of them more?

Because people who misuse those words also misuse others.

I never thought I'd get to use 'misuse' three times in one post. Hah, four!

RLSMiller · Nov 6, 2007

"I couldn't choose among"? That's the correct way to do things?

Screw correctness, I say.

Tish Davidson · Nov 6, 2007

RLSMiller said:
"I couldn't choose among"? That's the correct way to do things?

Screw correctness, I say.

You choose between two things or among more than two. It's always been that way.

RLSMiller · Nov 6, 2007

Tish Davidson said:
You choose between two things or among more than two. It's always been that way.

Ah, right. I knew that. Forgive my blonde moment.

donroc · Nov 6, 2007

I seldom hear a news reader and bee-ssing pundit use who on the tube. They are fixated on that. Also, most confuse their I and me, she and her, he and him. It is the equivalent of musical clinkers.

:rant:

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

paprikapink · Nov 6, 2007

Calling people "that" really gets under my skin. But whatcha gonna do? I think speaking and writing are merging as the time/distance between brain and print (screen or page) dwindles. People speak pretty sloppily and the boundary between speaking and writing seems to be getting thinner. Does anyone ever say "going to" anymore? Listen for it. Often it's not even "gonna," it's "unna" as in "I'munna shut up now."

scarletpeaches · Nov 6, 2007

a_sharp said:
...from the English language?

"The boy ~~that~~ who loved me."

"I couldn't choose ~~between~~ among the three of them."

I see these uses all over the place, including AW posts, and I wonder if anyone was paying attention in English 1A. For me they're real show-stoppers, just toss me right out of the read. Am I being too picky or did I just miss the bus?

Both of those would be correct. Or at least, the first one is; the second needs some work.

A boy is a person, not a thing, so he would be the one who loved me. And you don't choose between three things; you choose between two. So if you have more than two, you would choose from a particular number.

scarletpeaches · Nov 6, 2007

Tish Davidson said:
You choose between two things or among more than two. It's always been that way.

You wouldn't choose among certain things unless you were in the middle of them, and making a separate decision.

If you were picking one item out of a bunch you would choose from them.

a_sharp · Nov 7, 2007

paprikapink said:
Calling people "that" really gets under my skin. But whatcha gonna do? I think speaking and writing are merging as the time/distance between brain and print (screen or page) dwindles. People speak pretty sloppily and the boundary between speaking and writing seems to be getting thinner. Does anyone ever say "going to" anymore? Listen for it. Often it's not even "gonna," it's "unna" as in "I'munna shut up now."

Probably internet accessibility has a lot to do with it. Anyone can click a keyboard and most people do. The web is full of what donroc calls "clinkers" because most people blog and post the way they speak. Not wrong, just the way it is. So you see more "street talk" presented as writing today and somehow that gets accepted as "evolving use," which is horse-hockey.

Years ago, before the internet, most (not all) printed material was edited or proofread by someone competent, and it was an embarrassment to get caught with a grammatical error. Today nobody cares, except grammarians and proofreader pros. And a bunch of writers (whatta they know?).

scarletpeaches said:
Both of those would be correct. Or at least, the first one is; the second needs some work.

A boy is a person, not a thing, so he would be the one who loved me. And you don't choose between three things; you choose between two. So if you have more than two, you would choose from a particular number.

scarletpeaches said:
You wouldn't choose among certain things unless you were in the middle of them, and making a separate decision.

If you were picking one item out of a bunch you would choose from them.

My point is what others have already made, that two objects requires "between" and more than two should use "among," regardless of the sentence topic. Your example substituting "from" is a nice workaround for anyone not clear on the concept.

Thanks to all.

paprikapink · Nov 7, 2007

a_sharp said:
Probably internet accessibility has a lot to do with it. Anyone can click a keyboard and most people do. The web is full of what donroc calls "clinkers" because most people blog and post the way they speak. Not wrong, just the way it is. So you see more "street talk" presented as writing today and somehow that gets accepted as "evolving use," which is horse-hockey.

I don't dispute that this is horse-hockey, sounds plausible, but can you spell out for me the disconnect between street-talk merging with writing and evolving use. Or is "evolving use" as a concept itself horse-hockey? Again -- I don't ask as a form of argument, I just want to understand your point better.

Skippy · Nov 7, 2007

I think I would use street-talk in dialogue but not in description. just my 2 coppers worth.

a_sharp · Nov 7, 2007

paprikapink said:
I don't dispute that this is horse-hockey, sounds plausible, but can you spell out for me the disconnect between street-talk merging with writing and evolving use. Or is "evolving use" as a concept itself horse-hockey? Again -- I don't ask as a form of argument, I just want to understand your point better.

Evolving use as I understand it is an important facet of the language. An evolved word goes into our dictionaries and other reference works as authoritative and acceptable. Slang expressions are included. Grammatical aberrations: rarely. So, if the writing errors such as we're discussing here get excused as language evolution, I take exception.

I understand why street talk creeps into our digital vernacular--bloggers and posters can't be bothered to edit their work, and I don't blame them. It's a throwaway medium. A corporate mission statement on a home page is not the same.

My point was that erroneous grammar gets much greater play on the web than in print because of the web's proliferation in our lives. And those who can't be bothered to edit in throwaway digital media tend to propagate the same errors in print. I brought it up because I've already found the misuses of "who" and "among" all over the map. To me that is language corruption, not evolution.

I hope that clarifies what I said. Thanks for asking, Paprikapink.

choppersmom · Nov 7, 2007

A sharp's take on this totally jibes with my own. Too many people are embracing incorrect usage, and it's bogus to call it language evolution. It's just wrong, is what it is. Language evolution is when new words etc. are adopted, not when people are too lazy to get it right, so we just accept it. This has always been a prickly subject for me. I will on occasion write the way I speak, but most often, I make the effort to get it right.

Trish

brer · Nov 7, 2007

Among versus between:

I walked among the trees in the forest. And then I went into the farmer's field of corn.

I walked among the rows of corn; that I did when the farmer was not around.
When the farmer was there with his shotgun watching me, then I walked between the rows of corn.

Although, alas, I guess they both should be "among," but I don't think the farmer would've liked that. . . .

Yeah, I guess this is a useless post. Sorry about that. Ah couldn't help me self.

ErylRavenwell · Nov 7, 2007

a_sharp said:
...from the English language?

"The boy ~~that~~ who loved me."

"I couldn't choose ~~between~~ among the three of them."

I see these uses all over the place, including AW posts, and I wonder if anyone was paying attention in English 1A. For me they're real show-stoppers, just toss me right out of the read. Am I being too picky or did I just miss the bus?

Nothing wrong with the first one. It is well established now that you can call a person "that". The only difference between "that" and "who" is that only appositives with "who" can be set with commas.

Second one is horrendous. Between always implies two objects, persons etc.

Shweta · Nov 7, 2007

Actually, historically, a lot of language evolution is misuse that becomes standard. Speaking as a writer, that's unfortunate; speaking as a linguist, it happens.

As far as I can tell, "between" is starting to grow to replace "among" in some American dialects. Drives me up the wall. Among is a useful word.

But then, yonder was a useful word too, and "there" expanded to take on its meaning too. And I'm still annoyed that English lost the wit/kenning distinction.

Tish Davidson · Nov 8, 2007

brer said:
Among versus between:

I walked among the trees in the forest. And then I went into the farmer's field of corn.

I walked among the rows of corn; that I did when the farmer was not around.
When the farmer was there with his shotgun watching me, then I walked between the rows of corn.

Although, alas, I guess they both should be "among," but I don't think the farmer would've liked that. . . .

Yeah, I guess this is a useless post. Sorry about that. Ah couldn't help me self.

I'd say between the rows is correct because you are in the middle of only two rows. It's like saying then number 4 comes between 3 and 5 on the number line (even though there are lots of numbers in the number line).

wordsmith · Nov 8, 2007

choppersmom said:
...Too many people are embracing incorrect usage, and it's bogus to call it language evolution. It's just wrong, is what it is. Language evolution is when new words etc. are adopted, not when people are too lazy to get it right, so we just accept it. This has always been a prickly subject for me. I will on occasion write the way I speak, but most often, I make the effort to get it right.

Trish

and

...those who can't be bothered to edit in throwaway digital media tend to propagate the same errors in print. I brought it up because I've already found the misuses of "who" and "among" all over the map. To me that is language corruption, not evolution.

Right on!

I will say though, that there are times when incorrect speech is acceptable (as in a character speaks that way) or for some sort of regional emphasis, (for example, my DH, quite educated, still says "where're you at?" and it drives me bonkers!) But, in general, we should write (and in the propper situations speak) correctly. I think part of the problem is that "anyone can get published" (although, not everyone can be a writer) so when the ill-informed read work that is in print (or on the web) and substandard, they think "well it was in a book" or "it was in the paper" or "it was on the web" and take what they read as writing-rules gospel. There are also some editors who are asleep on the job, so things that shouldn't get through the cracks in print unfortunately do.

paprikapink · Nov 8, 2007

Between between and among, I say "pick 'em" (that's gambler-speak for even odds, in case I'm being obscure.) There is a difference, but it doesn't gall me to see it misused.

But as for calling people "that" I say it's dehumanizing. Next we're calling each other "it."

Thanks for the explanation, A Sharp. Now I see what you mean.

StoryG27 · Nov 8, 2007

ErylRavenwell said:
Nothing wrong with the first one. It is well established now that you can call a person "that". The only difference between "that" and "who" is that only appositives with "who" can be set with commas.

Well established? Really? Who established the rule and where the heck is it written?

ErylRavenwell · Nov 8, 2007

storygirl said:
Well established? Really? Who established the rule and where the heck is it written?

The writer's manual; Longman for instance (which has over 100,000 copies sold worldwide).

But note in Longman "that" is used for anonymous people or people as a collective. I need to find the older manual where "that" is an antecedent to "the boy". Maybe "well established" is too strong a word. I'm having my doubts now.

SpookyWriter · Nov 8, 2007

I walked among men who shared my ideas.

I walked between (in the middle) a group of men who were protesting the war.

I sat between two people.

I was among people my age who had something in common.

I walked between two flag poles...

I was among the crowd who waved flags from many countries when ....

Ziljon · Nov 8, 2007

To be 'tween a mongol and a whore, that is truly madness.

When did "who" and "among" disappear...

a_sharp

Somebody give me an A

Voyager

Ribbed for your pleasure.

Siddow

I'm super! Thanks for asking

RLSMiller

Tish Davidson

RLSMiller

donroc

Historicals and Horror rule

paprikapink

Bored fanatic

scarletpeaches

scarletpeaches

a_sharp

Somebody give me an A

paprikapink

Bored fanatic

Skippy

a_sharp

Somebody give me an A

choppersmom

---

brer

ErylRavenwell

Shweta

gone

Tish Davidson

wordsmith

practical experience, FTW

paprikapink

Bored fanatic

StoryG27

Miss Behave

ErylRavenwell

SpookyWriter

Ziljon

Tortilla di Patate