Re: the winners [parenthetical phrase]
There is little doubt that when a woman gets a bee in her bonnet then the
men had better watch out.
Richard - the bee man.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:42 PM
Subject: the winners [parenthetical phrase]
[note: written last night; held on request for e-mail kink to clear]
Wow. I never thought alt photographers knew so much grammar, about half of
which I don't understand (either because it's over my head or a kluge, or
both). But, unless someone can prove me wrong, I'm going to say none of
the above. "Poetic license" is T.S, as Diana, and I think two others,
mentioned. But I do have a relatively simple answer that doesn't require
(I was going to check with my brother, but I forgot, besides which, I
think he's off camping somewhere.)
First, permit me to declare two winners anyway: Don Sweet and Bob Kiss.
Don because his reply was essentially over my head, making it sound
plausible, tho I no longer (after two crashes) have strength to parse it.
And Bob for his phrase "poetic, emphatic, redundancy," poetic in itself,
and both because they arrived so promptly.
BUT Bob said:... "T.S. uses 'you and I' to refer back to the subject
pronoun 'us', all of which take the nominative case so you and "I" would
Unh, unh. If "'you and I' refers back to the subject pronoun 'us,'" which
it does, that's no help, because it's not true that "all take the
nominative": "us" is the *objective* (aka "accusative") case; "we" would
have been the nominative. And "Let we go now" wouldn't have worked, even
for T.S. (Phew, thanks for an easy one.)
So OK (Judy speaking again): IMO, line 3 is awful. But our issue is line
one. Now try the following:
Let us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherised upon a table...
I take "Let" for the imperative form of the verb, and "us" as its direct
object (properly in the objective case). I don't see any way "You and I"
could be the actual subject of the imperative "let," as was suggested (tho
it is *understood* as subject). I see it as a parenthetical phrase. The
parenthetical phrase must be set off by commas, as indeed "you and I" is
set off by commas....
I add here that several so-called grammar books were found lurking in and
around this house, but none had an entry for "parenthetical phrase." Which
goes to show how useless grammar books are when you need them.
("Parenthetical phrase" is not an obscure term.)
Here's another example: "I looked through several grammar books, and, if
you could believe, not a one of them had an entry for 'parenthetical
phrase.'" Here "if you could believe" is a parenthetical phrase. You could
think of it as a "weak parenthesis" (commas instead of parentheses).
"Vocative" case? Again, wow. I hadn't heard that word since high school
Latin (I think it was). Again not found in the grammar books. So I checked
Webster's. Seems from what I could tell without new eyeglasses to be a
form of direct address. In which case "you and I" would be wrong, just
like a recent case I will not mention, you wouldn't say "tell I." And, as
noted, I don't think it's necessary to reach so far.
Of course it would be simpler if it were names instead of pronouns: "Let
us go now, Franny & Zoey," but I daresay T.S. didn't know them.
I'm not sending this now because of the pause for repairs. It's 2:11 AM
Thursday. See you tomorrow.
love and vowels,
[This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your responsibility
to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you are
currently using to read this email. ]