I'd like to suggest something more mundane. "Why can't us," which I hadn't heard before but am not surprised at, joins the list of many uses of objective pronouns where a very formal grammar would insist on the subjective pronoun. H.L. Mencken discussed this with characteristic insight in The American Language. Here are some other cases:
(A knock at the door.)
Who's there? Me/It's me/I am/It is I. (The last is said, as far as I know, only by Jesus speaking Elizabethan English and my high school senior English teacher's daughter when I phoned and asked for her so I could ask her out.)
Me and Billy are going fishing
Billy and me are going fishing.
Me, too.
Us two'll go with you.
She ran as fast as/faster than me.
and, as cited, Why not us.
Notice the one place it doesn't show up is as sole subject of a sentence, as in "I'm going fishing."
What I think is going on is that the pragmatics of case selection is causing the grammar of case selection to change. While some of the examples above are pretty old in English, it is nonetheless the case that government of case in pronouns is becoming less a matter of what we call "grammatical case" and more a matter of pragmatic function. If the pronoun shows up in a place that is not simply topic, as is the case with all of the examples I've given, the objective form is used. Even in the coordinate subjects, the length of the subject, the fact that it's not just a single pronoun, means that it contains some new information. It's not just topic.
So how does this shift in usage come about? Objective pronouns, in the traditional grammatical sense, occur as direct objects and as objects of prepositions, which means they will often be late or even final in a sentence. Sentence-final position is typical the place for new information, which is why we tend to find the tonic accent for the sentence on the last stressed syllable. "Give it to me" places some newness or at least emphasis on "me" that "Gimme it" doesn't. As case marking has gradually disappeared in English, over the course of Middle English, the role of function, focus vs. topic, has led to the use of the objective, or focus, pronoun in places where there is some new information, relegating the subjective pronoun to those cases where it is purely topic.
Herb
Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of English
Ball State University
Muncie, IN 47306
[log in to unmask]
________________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Beth Young [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: November 23, 2008 7:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Why can't us?
I like this explanation. It also explains why "ain't" can be so effective--it has an emphatic "I'm one with the people" vibe.
thanks,
Beth
>>> Susan van Druten <[log in to unmask]> 11/23/2008 3:43 PM >>>
I would put it in the same category too, but I think I can explain
why it works. "We was robbed" sounds like a group of little guys
being outwitted by smarter, slicker thinkers who know the rules and
loopholes and can use it against the ignorant who only know they have
been cheated but can't express a sound argument to prove why their
loss is unfair.
I think the phrase "Why can't us?" expresses the underdog spirit of a
come-from-behind, just-folks, pseudo-Palin mentality. We have been
so down-trodden, ain't it our turn now, gosh darn it?
On Nov 23, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Beth Young wrote:
> I put "why can't us" in the same category as "we was robbed." I
> wish I knew of a good way to explain to students when / how a
> grammatical mistake becomes rhetorically effective.
>
> Language Log talked a bit about "why can't us" here: http://
> languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=746
>
> Beth
>
>>>> Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]> 11/23/2008 2:22 PM >>>
> "A caller from Delaware chimed in to share his joy for the
> Fightins. He may have created the next great catchphrase, saying,
> 'Boston did it. The White Sox did it. Why can't us? Why can't us?"
>
> From the Washington Post sports section.
>
> We like "why can't we?" but what about "Why not us?", which is
> sometimes heard?
>
>
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
