Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

For some reason I just got a telling-off for a text I sent to someone, saying that my grammar was bad for a seasonal teacher of English. I searched around for an answer but there doesn't seem to be anything conclusive. So I thought I'd make an effort for an answer here.

Which is correct:
(i) Can you wake John and I up when you leave?

or...

(ii) Can you wake John and me up when you leave?

He seems convinced that the second one is correct, but I'm sure that the first is ideal. It's ok to say 'John and me' but it's better to write 'John and I', isn't that right? Apparently a long discussion with an English professor proved that it should be 'John and me' because the 'me' comes after the verb, and therefore deducting 'John and' would cause the sentence to fail, but I'm sure the subject of 'I' rather than the object 'me' is better because it makes 'John' the principle and 'I' the accessory, which is more polite.

FYI, the answer 'None of the above, this is stupid' has already been agreed, so we need something else I'm afraid.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

All I know is I wouldn't say "Can you wake I up when you leave?" I can't think of a reason why the "John and" part would change that.

I don't think whether the noun/pronoun follows the verb matters. If I'm not mistaken, it's what's actually doing that verb that matters, if that makes sense. In this case, it's "you."

This post has been edited by Galsic on 21st February 2010 09:17

--------------------

Console RPG Cliches

My wife is a grammer queen (was going into english at the local university). She corrects me all the time on this. To determine if it is "I" or "me", you always drop anyone else. So it's "Can you wake I up when you leave..." or "Can you wake me up when you leave...."

Obviously in this case, the latter is correct. I still say "John and I" in cases like this all the time, but now when she's around, I can atleast correct myself before she does.

Edit: Linkage! Me and I

This post has been edited by Fadien on 21st February 2010 09:21

--------------------

"And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped” -Sir Bedevere the Wise

Quote (Galsic)

All I know is I wouldn't say "Can you wake I up when you leave?" I can't think of a reason why the "John and" part would change that.

Quote (Fadien)

To determine if it is "I" or "me", you always drop anyone else.  So it's "Can you wake I up when you leave..." or "Can you wake me up when you leave...."

That's exactly what he was getting at, and thanks for the link. I understand the principle here but I don't agree with it for three reasons.

Firstly, changing the sentence to determine whether to use 'I' or 'me' loses the point of the sentence and therefore isn't relevant. It's like a hard mathematical rule which forgets the point of word choices. Writing 'I' is more personal than 'me' so in some cases it would be almost inconsistent to write the latter. I believe only parenthesis can be removed with this method. A sentence, not including parenthesis, should be taken at the immediate level so the point is not lost.

Secondly, I think in general 'I' is preferable to 'me' on a phonetic level, so it's better to stick with what sounds best. I understand that it's possible to structure sentences so that the 'John and I' is at the start but it won't always be desirable.

Thirdly, I've said it before, it's more polite to make 'John' the principle subject and I believe 'I' lends itself more to him than 'me' which is crude and sets out a subject in itself. (No I meant object here, I bet this is getting frustrating now!)

As a general example of all these points I'd prefer to write 'I was reminded of home when I saw the birds' than 'The birds I saw reminded me of home'. The two sentences are very different.

Basically, I was clearly wrong about the rule, but I just thought I'd share the reasons why I still think the 'John and I' is better, just to see what you think.

This post has been edited by sweetdude on 22nd February 2010 10:58

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

Quote (sweetdude @ 21st February 2010 05:09)

Firstly, changing the sentence to determine whether to use 'I' or 'me' loses the point of the sentence and therefore isn't relevant. It's like a hard mathematical rule which forgets the point of word choices. Writing 'I' is more personal than 'me' so in some cases it would be almost inconsistent to write the latter. I believe only parenthesis can be removed with this method. A sentence, not including parenthesis, should be taken at the immediate level so the point is not lost.

Quote

Thirdly, I've said it before, it's more polite to make 'John' the principle subject and I believe 'I' lends itself more to him than 'me' which is crude and sets out a subject in itself.

Are these actual concepts of English? The more you talk about them, the more subjective they sound.

Quote

As a general example of all these points I'd prefer to write 'I was reminded of home when I saw the birds' than 'The birds I saw reminded me of home'. The two sentences are very different.

In structure, yep, quite different, though, this time, I don't think there's anything wrong with either case (there is a grammatical error in your "wake" example), so, unless all you're saying is you prefer your version (for seemingly subjective reasons), I'm afraid I fail to see your point this time around : / .

This post has been edited by Galsic on 21st February 2010 12:38

--------------------

Console RPG Cliches

Wait, aren't you Scottish? I mean, it would seem to me that unless you're talking to another Scot, it won't matter, because nobody will understand what you're saying anyway.



--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

I don't see what the problem here is. "John and me" is the direct object of the sentence, while the subject is the interrogative "you." I is always a subject, and me is always a direct object. In this case, me is grammatically correct, and I is grammatically incorrect. I honestly don't think it's enough of a big deal to matter in conversation or in a text on your cell phone, but if you were writing a paper you'd definitely use "John and me."

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

It's John and me.

Why? Because if you were to remove John from the sentence, you would get:

"Can you please wake me up?"

However in the other example, were you to do the same thing, you get: "Can you please wake I up?" which is obviously grammatically wrong. A common rule to checking grammar is removing the 'fluff' in a sentence until you get the bare minimum parts. Can you wake me. Can you wake I.

As for the technical explanation, I believe it's that you use "me" when you're the receiver of the action, while you use "I" when you're the do-er. For example:

John and I woke up (ooh la la!)
Since your'e doing the waking up, it's I

John woke me up.
Since you're being woke up, it's me

I hope that helps

--------------------

"A little tight, but the price was right" - Locke
"Oh, what a Fuddy Duddy" - Relm
"..." - Shadow
"I'm a General, not some love starved twit" - Celes
"Although Edgar showers his attention on the ladies, most are smart enough to pay him no attention. Oh! King Edgar!" - Figaro Castle Inn Attendant

Quote (laszlow @ 21st February 2010 06:02)

I don't see what the problem here is. "John and me" is the direct object of the sentence, while the subject is the interrogative "you." I is always a subject, and me is always a direct object. In this case, me is grammatically correct, and I is grammatically incorrect. I honestly don't think it's enough of a big deal to matter in conversation or in a text on your cell phone, but if you were writing a paper you'd definitely use "John and me."

laszlow is correct, the issue at hand is the function of the pronouns in your sentence. Pronouns can be subjective, possessive, or objective. As laszlow pointed out, the subject of the sentence is "you," while the direct object is "John and me." Since those are the cases, you have to use the subjective form of the 2nd-person singular (since you're addressing a single individual, presumably), which is "you" (and in fact "you" is the correct form whether or not it is subjective singular, subjective plural, objective singular, or objective plural) and the objective form of the 1st-person singular, which is "me."

Again, as laszlow already stated, it's not a big deal in conversation, since you'll invariably be understood, but in a paper this is the correct, proscriptive grammar approach.

Others have already given the correct explanation, but I have another way to tell. If you forget about this for ten minutes and then read both sentences out loud, which one sounds stupid? Most native English speakers would know which the correct version was according to their inner grammar; it's just worrying about "proper" English that causes stilted over-corrections like that.

For linguists, the concept of "correct" grammar is based on idea. Trying to avoid placing a preposition at the end of the clause is another example of something that confuses the heck out of people and makes them talk funny. Also, worrying about the fact that I just modified a verb with an adjective.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

Quote (Galsic)

Are these actual concepts of English?  The more you talk about them, the more subjective they sound.

Quote

As a general example of all these points I'd prefer to write 'I was reminded of home when I saw the birds' than 'The birds I saw reminded me of home'. The two sentences are very different.

In structure, yep, quite different, though, this time, I don't think there's anything wrong with either case (there is a grammatical error in your "wake" example), so, unless all you're saying is you prefer your version (for seemingly subjective reasons), I'm afraid I fail to see your point this time around : / .

Haha, no it's all made-up, I do that a lot. I don't know much about the technical details and that's why I made this thread. In the example I gave they're both correct but one uses 'I' and the other 'me'. In my opinion the 'I' is always better. So, yeah, I prefer it for purely subjective reasons. But leading on from this is why I'd still prefer to say 'John and I' even if it's incorrect.

Thanks for the help everyone. I do understand why I'm wrong and I've admitted that I was wrong here, I'm now just wondering if anyone thinks that precise word definition should supersede grammatical accuracy? I believe it should. Have a look at my post above for the reasons.

Quote (laszlow)

I don't see what the problem here is. "John and me" is the direct object of the sentence, while the subject is the interrogative "you."

Well there are a few problems that I've mentioned in my post before. Is 'John and me' really the object or are they two objects? If they're two objects, that fact might be inconsistent with the sentence whereby you want a partnership to be as one, and if they are one object then they shouldn't be broken down into 'John and' and 'me' because it might lose the point of the sentence. Does that make sense? It goes back to the reasons that ''I' and 'me' have much greater differences in connotations than something purely grammatical like 'were' and 'was'.

Quote (R51)

Wait, aren't you Scottish? I mean, it would seem to me that unless you're talking to another Scot, it won't matter, because nobody will understand what you're saying anyway.

The question is then between 'Hai g'an wake me an' Johnny up win' ye' leave lass' and 'Hai g'an wake Johnny an' me up win' ye' leave lass'.

Quote (Kane)

Again, as laszlow already stated, it's not a big deal in conversation, since you'll invariably be understood, but in a paper this is the correct, proscriptive grammar approach.

That's what I find a bit frustrating about marking. There's no opportunity to explain why you want to write something peculiar. I mean, c'mon, whatever happened to the 'anything goes as long as you remain consistent in your use of it' rule? I liked that one.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

Quote

I mean, c'mon, whatever happened to the 'anything goes as long as you remain consistent in your use of it' rule? I liked that one.

This rule only applies when you get to choose between more than one grammatically correct versions, like in the case of choosing between British English and American English on this board, the dilemma I'm facing every once in a while.

The problem here is that you tend to use incorrect syntax to convey some sort of semantic message that is actually not there. While it may seem to you that the meaning of "I" is clear, it will certainly not be the case for your interlocutor. The grammatical rules are there so that the message stays clear and understandable and it is not very advisable, not as long as you have to live in a world where you have to deal with people who don't know of this linguistic manner of yours, to ignore them.

Sorry, but my advice is that you try to get used to using "me" in such cases.

--------------------

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one...

Quote (Silver_Zombie @ 22nd February 2010 03:03)

Quote

I mean, c'mon, whatever happened to the 'anything goes as long as you remain consistent in your use of it' rule? I liked that one.

This rule only applies when you get to choose between more than one grammatically correct versions, like in the case of choosing between British English and American English on this board, the dilemma I'm facing every once in a while.

The problem here is that you tend to use incorrect syntax to convey some sort of semantic message that is actually not there. While it may seem to you that the meaning of "I" is clear, it will certainly not be the case for your interlocutor. The grammatical rules are there so that the message stays clear and understandable and it is not very advisable, not as long as you have to live in a world where you have to deal with people who don't know of this linguistic manner of yours, to ignore them.

Sorry, but my advice is that you try to get used to using "me" in such cases.

I don't agree with anything you wrote there. Writing should never be limited to grammatical rules and accuracy. Imagine if you took William Faulkner aside and told him that his poor grammar in The Sound and the Fury caused you to dislike the book and lose all understanding of his meaning. The entire idea is that his character's declining mental health is linked with the stream of conciousness and declining sense. It's consistent and therefore works. The same thing applies to this problem, if my point is lost or I simply don't like using 'me' then I shouldn't be constricted to it. As another example, if I was writing first-person about someone who was full of themselves, or if I wanted my reader to really gather that this was MY academic research and not something I'd read, then I'd want to maintain 'I' as much as possible even if it was grammatically incorrect. Saying that nobody else follows my linguistic style is a crippling detriment to creativity and interesting writing. I remember one tutor of mine showed me some papers from students who previously went to a Steiner school. They were amazing, absolutely no barriers on their writing, the point was clear, and their work was graded better than anything I could achieve.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

I'm sorry, sweetdude, but your argument is neither here nor there. You asked which sentence was grammatically correct, and now you're on a rant about how writing "should never be limited to grammatical rules and accuracy" and using classic literature and the use of a pronoun as a metaphor to support your argument.

You asked a simple question, several people gave satisfactory answers, and now you're on a soapbox. When you asked "which is correct?" did you really expect to launch into a discussion of Faulkner and Joyce or did you just want to clarify a rule of traditional grammar?

I think that the point Silver_Zombie was trying to make is that the pronoun "I" in your sentence could cloud the logic of your sentence to a non-native English speaker that searches for the differences between pronouns to decipher a sentence. English is extremely annoying in the homogeneity of its pronouns (i.e. you vs. you vs. you), and your challenging Silver_Zombie with Faulker is basically asking a non-expert of the English language to understand the notoriously difficult Faulkner.

Also,

Quote (sweetdude)

Is 'John and me' really the object or are they two objects? If they're two objects, that fact might be inconsistent with the sentence whereby you want a partnership to be as one, and if they are one object then they shouldn't be broken down into 'John and' and 'me' because it might lose the point of the sentence. Does that make sense?

Nope, it's called a compound object. It's one subject and one verb modifying two nouns linked by the conjunction "and," so the noun-and-noun is the object, even if it's more than one individual entity. It's not like the verb "wake" is affecting the two nouns differently or that the speaker wants to attribute different qualities to either noun. If that was the case, you need to separate the two objects into different clauses or different sentences.

EDIT: and if context is creating a different connotation to "me," then how are we supposed to be able to tell from that one sentence? Saying that "I" and "me" have different connotations to the point where it makes a significant difference in the meaning of the sentence is a question of literature and not of grammar. "Me" is grammatically correct, and "I" is grammatically incorrect in that situation. You're making this question out to be far more complicated than it actually is.

This post has been edited by laszlow on 22nd February 2010 15:25

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

Quote (laszlow)

I'm sorry, sweetdude, but your argument is neither here nor there.  You asked which sentence was grammatically correct, and now you're on a rant about how writing "should never be limited to grammatical rules and accuracy" and using classic literature and the use of a pronoun as a metaphor to support your argument. 

You asked a simple question, several people gave satisfactory answers, and now you're on a soapbox.  When you asked "which is correct?" did you really expect to launch into a discussion of Faulkner and Joyce or did you just want to clarify a rule of traditional grammar? 

I think that the point Silver_Zombie was trying to make is that the pronoun "I" in your sentence could cloud the logic of your sentence to a non-native English speaker that searches for the differences between pronouns to decipher a sentence.  English is extremely annoying in the homogeneity of its pronouns (i.e. you vs. you vs. you), and your challenging Silver_Zombie with Faulker is basically asking a non-expert of the English language to understand the notoriously difficult Faulkner.

You're completely right. I didn't mean to jump onto the soapbox again, sorry. If anything maybe I should've made a new topic on this. I just thought that the question had been answered and it raised a new one, but maybe not. I did want clarification of a rule I couldn't find, that's right, but I got a bit carried away. I usually like it when topics go down their natural course and either die (like this one probably will now) or develop a little further.

Quote (laszlow)

Also,

Quote (sweetdude)

Is 'John and me' really the object or are they two objects? If they're two objects, that fact might be inconsistent with the sentence whereby you want a partnership to be as one, and if they are one object then they shouldn't be broken down into 'John and' and 'me' because it might lose the point of the sentence. Does that make sense?

Nope, it's called a compound object. It's one subject and one verb modifying two nouns linked by the conjunction "and," so the noun-and-noun is the object, even if it's more than one individual entity. It's not like the verb "wake" is affecting the two nouns differently or that the speaker wants to attribute different qualities to either noun. If that was the case, you need to separate the two objects into different clauses or different sentences.

I find that really interesting. I think the point of pushing these questions a bit further is to get at stuff like this.

Yeah I definitely missed the point about speakers of English as a second or third language. But I didn't mean to challenge SZ into Faulkner, I just believe that he is one of the best-known authors for pushing writing beyond the standard rules. I know that sounds inadequate but you know what I mean. I actually thought it was an obvious example, not something intended to cause confusion. Looking back, however, I didn't mean to sound so aggressive, sorry SZ. Let's just say I had an aggressive day, and I let it slip in a bit here.

Quote (laszlow)

EDIT: and if context is creating a different connotation to "me,"  then how are we supposed to be able to tell from that one sentence?  Saying that "I" and "me" have different connotations to the point where it makes a significant difference in the meaning of the sentence is a question of literature and not of grammar.  "Me" is grammatically correct, and "I" is grammatically incorrect in that situation.  You're making this question out to be far more complicated than it actually is.

I mean in general. I've written that I was wrong quite a few times now, I'm not debating that. Yes, it is a question of literature, but grammar comes into it. I'm asking if the choosing of 'I' or 'me' should supersede grammar or not. I'm presuming that you're answering yes, is that right? It does come back to the original question because I'd still prefer to use 'I' even if it is grammatically incorrect.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

Quote (sweetdude @ 22nd February 2010 11:13)

I mean in general. I've written that I was wrong quite a few times now, I'm not debating that. Yes, it is a question of literature, but grammar comes into it. I'm asking if the choosing of 'I' or 'me' should supersede grammar or not. I'm presuming that you're answering yes, is that right? It does come back to the original question because I'd still prefer to use 'I' even if it is grammatically incorrect.

Sorry if it sounded like I was attacking you, sweetdude. I just thought you had taken the argument a little too far away from what I thought it was - a simple grammar question. But, for my final statement - as a question of grammar, me is more correct than I. As a question of literature, I should supersede me if the author chooses it so. When it's a question of literature, you can break grammatical rules, but you absolutely need a reason to; when it comes to writing a story, every word needs to be justified.

This post has been edited by laszlow on 22nd February 2010 16:45

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

Quote

English is extremely annoying in the homogeneity of its pronouns (i.e. you vs. you vs. you), and your challenging Silver_Zombie with Faulker is basically asking a non-expert of the English language to understand the notoriously difficult Faulkner.

Don't worry, I don't mind. And while I may not be an expert when it comes to English, I did study English grammar for some time already AND I do know how cases work (which may be a pain for English-speaking people) since they exist in their fullest in Polish.

Now, coming back to Faulkner, I absolutely agree with you, sweetdude, that grammar should not limit a purely artistic message. If you want to write a grammatically incorrect text for art's sake, please go ahead. What I meant, however, is that on a daily basis you should stick to using grammatically correct forms. In speech. Writing for the sake of art is a completely different subject.

--------------------

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one...

I'm sorry to say your friend was irrevocably, unmistakably, 100% correct, and you were wrong. The reason is because "I" is not the subject in the sentence you gave; it's a direct object. Subjects are always "I." Direct/indirect objects are always "me."

The simplest way to see this is to erase "John and," as Locke_Cole pointed out.

EDIT: If your argument is a stylistic one, then I have a counter-argument. The appearance of "I" in a sentence is always, or should always, be indicative of some kind of action about to take place on the part of "I," being as it's a subject marker. So it's jarring to read

"She woke John and I."

... because a part of the mind is expecting to read something like,

"She woke John and I helped her."

So it ends up sounding abrupt, in addition to sounding rather pretentious.

This post has been edited by L. Cully on 22nd February 2010 21:40

--------------------

Some ghost of me might greet my son
the day he is delivered.


Eternal Sleep, Track 1-1: The Blue Planet

Quote (sweetdude @ 22nd February 2010 08:13)

I didn't mean to challenge SZ into Faulkner, I just believe that he is one of the best-known authors for pushing writing beyond the standard rules.

Quote

That's what I find a bit frustrating about marking. There's no opportunity to explain why you want to write something peculiar. I mean, c'mon, whatever happened to the 'anything goes as long as you remain consistent in your use of it' rule? I liked that one.

Just a quick comment going off of your statements. You mentioned both Faulkner's and your own use of non-standard syntax in writing. When you mentioned your own, you referred to being marked without any chance to explain the artistic effect you were going for. Are you in a creative writing class (or doing creative writing work in a non-creative writing class, for that matter)? If you're not, then I don't know that you can expect to be given such an opportunity; furthermore, trying to create some sort of artistic effect in such a setting is likely to cause more problems than it's worth. With Faulkner--and maybe I misinterpreted you--it seems to me that your view is that Faulkner's is the voice using the non-standard syntax. For me, Benjy's voice is the only one employing non-standard syntax, in what I presume is 1) an awesome display of Faulkner's range, and 2) a successful display of verisimilitude. Since Benjy is mentally handicapped we would hardly expect him to speak with the same speech pattern as either of his siblings, you know?

P.S. I hope you don't feel at all attacked from my end, either. I think the use of non-standard syntax in writing a worthwhile topic to explore, but feel that there has to be a compelling reason to do so--beyond "I wanted to".

Quote (Kane @ 22nd February 2010 19:51)

Quote (sweetdude @ 22nd February 2010 08:13)

I didn't mean to challenge SZ into Faulkner, I just believe that he is one of the best-known authors for pushing writing beyond the standard rules.

Quote

That's what I find a bit frustrating about marking. There's no opportunity to explain why you want to write something peculiar. I mean, c'mon, whatever happened to the 'anything goes as long as you remain consistent in your use of it' rule? I liked that one.

Just a quick comment going off of your statements. You mentioned both Faulkner's and your own use of non-standard syntax in writing. When you mentioned your own, you referred to being marked without any chance to explain the artistic effect you were going for. Are you in a creative writing class (or doing creative writing work in a non-creative writing class, for that matter)? If you're not, then I don't know that you can expect to be given such an opportunity; furthermore, trying to create some sort of artistic effect in such a setting is likely to cause more problems than it's worth. With Faulkner--and maybe I misinterpreted you--it seems to me that your view is that Faulkner's is the voice using the non-standard syntax. For me, Benjy's voice is the only one employing non-standard syntax, in what I presume is 1) an awesome display of Faulkner's range, and 2) a successful display of verisimilitude. Since Benjy is mentally handicapped we would hardly expect him to speak with the same speech pattern as either of his siblings, you know?

P.S. I hope you don't feel at all attacked from my end, either. I think the use of non-standard syntax in writing a worthwhile topic to explore, but feel that there has to be a compelling reason to do so--beyond "I wanted to".

Non-standard syntax being applied to creative writing is usually only accepted in first person writing or dialogue, from my experience. I haven't read Faulkner so I'm not sure what you're citing, but you seem to bring up that the Benjy (which I'm assuming is the main character and the voice of the book) is, indeed, speaking in 1st person, in which case syntax errors become an artistic choice.

And even then, only certain syntax errors can be broken so as not to confuse the reader. For instance, amiguity in pronouns is something an author would never want to do, 1st person or dialogue, unless it was a set up for a joke or a purposeful misinterpretation. Unfortunately plenty of authors make that error without trying, which is embarassing...

--------------------

"A little tight, but the price was right" - Locke
"Oh, what a Fuddy Duddy" - Relm
"..." - Shadow
"I'm a General, not some love starved twit" - Celes
"Although Edgar showers his attention on the ladies, most are smart enough to pay him no attention. Oh! King Edgar!" - Figaro Castle Inn Attendant

can't you just say "wake us up."?

It sounds a lot simpler than anything I've read here and I've eaten part of a dictionary so I think I should have been able to understand it...education does work like radiation right?

--------------------

Since I advertise CoN there I think it's only fair that I advertise The Wiki here.

[English nerd] Faulkner uses free indirect discourse in The Sound and the Fury, meaning that the character voices bleed into the narrative. Benji's mentally disabled, so the narrative in his section is particularly grammatically incorrect.

If you're writing fiction in a free indirect discourse style, then of course your narrative should reflect that. In any other capacity, though, it just makes you sound, with apologies to Benji, a little retarded.[/English nerd]

This post has been edited by L. Cully on 23rd February 2010 19:15

--------------------

Some ghost of me might greet my son
the day he is delivered.


Eternal Sleep, Track 1-1: The Blue Planet

Quote (Locke_Cole @ 22nd February 2010 17:14)

Non-standard syntax being applied to creative writing is usually only accepted in first person writing or dialogue, from my experience. I haven't read Faulkner so I'm not sure what you're citing, but you seem to bring up that the Benjy (which I'm assuming is the main character and the voice of the book) is, indeed, speaking in 1st person, in which case syntax errors become an artistic choice. [emphasis added]

And even then, only certain syntax errors can be broken so as not to confuse the reader. For instance, amiguity in pronouns is something an author would never want to do, 1st person or dialogue, unless it was a set up for a joke or a purposeful misinterpretation. Unfortunately plenty of authors make that error without trying, which is embarassing...

My whole point in bringing it back up was that it's not simply an artistic choice so much as it is an artistic choice designed to have a certain effect (in this case, immersion in the story due to the high degree of believability presented by Benjy).

Furthermore, while pronoun ambiguity is never something I'd recommend, if the character-narrator (as opposed to some sort of omniscient author-narrator--the "standard" sort, if you'll excuse the generalization) might make that sort of mistake (someone like Benjy, for instance), I'd be willing to overlook even that.

In other words, even if you have 1st-person narration/dialogue, you "can't" simply decide to break the rules; there must be commensurate cause to do so. If your main character is a WASP, he's not liable to break out the "Yo, fo' shizzle my nizzle,"* is he?

*abomination of language