# You are not the boss of me - Grammar help



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

So my wife and I were talking last night and the phase "you are not the boss of me" came up. I remember being a kid and all the kids would say that. We would always get corrected though and told it should be "you are not my boss" instead.

Well now that I am older and actually care about proper grammar, I would like to know what the reason is behind this. My wife asked me and I did not know. I felt kind of dumb actually because I started to question if it even was wrong or if the adults at the time were just teaching us incorrectly. You are not the boss of me just does not sound right to me ear, but is it actually grammatically incorrect and if so, why?


----------



## texasgirl (Jan 9, 2007)

I always say, you're not my boss. Didn't realize that I was incorrect, but, sounds better and more mean that way, LOL


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

Oh TG, what I am saying (as far as I know) is that you are correct to say it the way you are saying it. You are not incorrect from what I know.


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 9, 2007)

At the least, it's very non-standard sentence structure for American English.

I have noticed a reluctance to use possessives on TV news as well.


----------



## Alix (Jan 9, 2007)

Still a possessive in "my boss" though Andy. I think it was more to do with ending with the preposition so close to the end of the sentence. 

OK, I SHOULD know the answer to this but I really don't. The only reason I can think of is that saying "you are not the boss of me" implies that they ARE the boss of someone. Whereas "you are not my boss" just suggests that they don't have influence over you. More of an implication rather than a grammatical error IMO.


----------



## boufa06 (Jan 9, 2007)

GB, judging by the sound of it, I think it's a silly expression.  Silly or not, sometimes such phrases do catch on.


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 9, 2007)

Alix said:
			
		

> Still a possessive in "my boss" though Andy. I think it was more to do with ending with the preposition so close to the end of the sentence...


 


I meant there is no possessive in the original version, "You are not the boss of me".  

I'd love to know why the media avoids possessives.  Any idea?


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

boufa06 said:
			
		

> GB, judging by the sound of it, I think it's a silly expression.  Silly or not, sometimes such phrases do catch on.


Silly indeed. It was something that kids would say. For instance if a kid told another kid to move out of the way the response might be "No, you are not the boss of me. I am staying right here".


----------



## Alix (Jan 9, 2007)

Ooooooooooo! Gotcha Andy (clearly working late at night has a serious affect on my mental capacity in the AM *forehead slap*). I'll ask Ken about the possessives in media, but my suspicion is that the news folk are supposed to remain objective and using a possessive indicates a personal opinion. Just conjecture on my part though.


----------



## VeraBlue (Jan 9, 2007)

I see nothing wrong with the sentence.  If you were to change the noun at the end to a proper noun you'll see why.  You are not the boss of John, or you are not the boss of that group.   All grammatically correct.  

You are not my boss, in my opinion, says the same thing as you are not the boss of me, only in less words.  

It's not even the word 'me' at the end.  Change the sentence....give it to me is correct, whereas give it to myself is wrong.

I've searched my education knowledge...and cannot find how the sentence is incorrect.


----------



## Alix (Jan 9, 2007)

Me too Vera. I ran through all those scenarios and all I could come up with was the implication of the sentence rather than the actual construction. Cool question. Wonder where Miss mudbug is? She will want to weigh in on this one.


----------



## XeniA (Jan 9, 2007)

You're not the uncle of me.
You're not the garbage man of me.
You're not the friend of me.

Hmmm. I _think_ it's just a standard word order issue. After all, they all make perfect sense and would be understandable by any speaker. It's this sort of thing that separate the natives from the foreigners!

(I just gave away my copy of the book that would have given us the answer here ("Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan, a teachers' reference that is wonderful and answers just this sort of weird question ...) and wouldn't you know, this is the FIFTH time I've wanted it since I gave it away. Gotta get another copy!)

Sorry, GB. Bottom line is that I'm no help.


----------



## PA Baker (Jan 9, 2007)

I believe it's because you are not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition (of, to, from, with...).  I think.  And I should know--it's a sad statement but I was an English major in college, received my degree with highest honors, and never once did I have to take a grammar course.  In fact, the longest term paper I had to write was 10 pages! 

Anyway, that's the only reason I can think of.  Or is it of which I can think??!


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

But the sentence does not end in a preposition. The last word is me.

On a side not, my cousin, who is a magazine editor, recently told me that the rule about ending a sentence in a preposition is not longer true. There was another part of the rule now, but I have since forgotten it. I found that really interesting and helpful since I do like to end in preps sometimes


----------



## PA Baker (Jan 9, 2007)

GB said:
			
		

> But the sentence does not end in a preposition. The last word is me.


 
Prepositional phrase ("of me"). Sorry.

I agree with your cousin.  A lot of grammar rules are being revised. With email and the internet, conversational English is a lot more accepted in formal settings and in writing now.


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

Language used to bore me, but I am really starting to find it fascinating!


----------



## VeraBlue (Jan 9, 2007)

GB said:
			
		

> Language used to bore me, but I am really starting to find it fascinating!



Indeed, I find language, especially the written missive, fascinating.  Claiming even the slightest grip of the language is much more than most can claim.  Composition is truly a lost art of this century.


----------



## mudbug (Jan 9, 2007)

'tis fascinating indeed, geebs.  

"You are not the boss of me" is kind of grammatically correct, although awkward.  Look at Ayrton's examples.  "You are not the boss of her/him" has the same construction but sounds more likely to the ear.  Usually we would say "not my/her/his boss" but also would say "not the boss of Alix/this department/the universe."  There's probably a rule about using the pronouns (me, her, him) vs. the nouns (Alix, geebs, department, universe) but I've forgotten it.

You can end sentences with prepositional phrases.  In fact, Winston Churchill came up with a beaut in response to that outdated rule:  "That is a *** (not sure he actually used the word "rule") up with which I will not put."

We do it all the time:
When did you get in?
Who let the dogs out?
What's up?


----------



## Buck (Jan 9, 2007)

It's almost like an active/passive voice kind of difference.
eg: I bought the farm/the farm was bought by me.

"You are not the boss of me" is a slightly stronger construction than the other because of the position of "me".  In the spoken word the most emphasis is gained by putting the important word at te end of the sentence.

Also, I agree with PA Baker; a prepostion is a bad thing to end a sentence _with_.


----------



## mudbug (Jan 9, 2007)

Buck, I try to teach my engineers about the difference between active/passive voice as follows:
Active - the cow jumped over the moon
Passive - the moon was jumped over by the cow.

and the classic use of passive voice for when nobody wants to admit anything:
Mistakes were made.


----------



## Buck (Jan 9, 2007)

Muddy,
My favorite active/passive voice example is:
It has been deemed inappropriate to......
Okay, fair enough.  We've all run into that.  BUT did you ever stop to think that you never encounter that in active voice.  When's the last time you asked somebody what they're doing and they told you they were in the process of deeming?
Huh?  When?


----------



## daisy (Jan 9, 2007)

'You are not the boss of me' is perfectly grammatically correct, if a little antiquated in usage.

You can say 'my boss' with equal correctness.

Here are some more examples of the possessive:

my friend's mother = the mother of my friend
your friend = the friend of you
our friend - the friend of us

In such examples, 'of' is a sort of abbreviation for 'belonging to', so these phrases could be said as

the mother belonging to my friend
the friend belonging to you
the friend belonging to us

Or, to carry it a step further, 'belonging to' can also become 'owned by', as in:

the mother owned by my friend (etc)

Of course, nobody would say that about a person, but if you're talking of other things, it can be quite correct, as in:

the car owned by my friend = the car belonging to my friend = my friend's car.

An apostrophe (') can indicate ownership (the possessive case), as in the following:

my friend's boss (the boss of my friend)
his neighbour's house (or if there is more than one neighbour it becomes 'his neighbours' house)
your husband's sister's daughter's child (the child of the daughter of the sister of your husband) 

Note: there is no apostrophe in the possessive "its". Take a close look at the following sentences. The apostrophe in the second sentence indicates a missing letter. It stands for 'i', as an 'It is'. 'It' is the pronoun which stands for 'the cat'. 

The cat lost its tail. It's in pain. 

The rule of possessiveness has nothing to do with ending sentences with a preposition. A preposition (look at the word closely - pre-position - 'put in a place BEFORE') is different from a 'personal pronoun'. 

Examples of prepositions: to, by, above, before, after, towards, of, along, and about a zillion others. Examples: 'to the shop', 'by the river', 'above your head', 'before dinner', 'after the storm', 'towards the east', 'of the family', 'along the road'. 

Examples of personal pronouns: If the person is the subject of the sentence, the pronoun will be: I, you, it, he, she, they. If the person is the object of the sentence, the pronoun will be: me, you, it, him, her, them.

I (subject) gave the book to you (object). 
You (subject) gave the book to her (object)
They (subject) gave the books to them (object)

Note the following sentences:

"My husband and I received gifts." (In this case, both 'my husband' and 'I' can begin the sentence, so you'd say 'My husband received gifts' or 'I received gifts'. This is a sentence with two subjects.

"Gifts were given to my husband and me." In this case, 'gifts' is the subject, and 'my husband' becomes an object', as does 'me', because they come after the verb and a preposition'. Again, you can make two sentences out of the one: 'Gifts were given to my husband'. 'Gifts were given 'to me'. 

You would never say 'Gifts were given to I', or 'Me was given gifts', would you? 

Equally, you'd never say 'Gifts were given to they', or 'Them were given gifts.' 

The personal pronoun changes according to where it is used in a sentence. 

Pronouns are used to replace nouns or names, where the use of those can become cumbersome.

"I" can replace the full name of a single person speaking about him/herself.

"You" can replace the full name of the person another person is speaking to (or to put that more grammatically correct "....to whom another person is speaking"!) As in: 'You are my friend' stands for 'The person to whom I am speaking who goes by the name of....... is my friend' (the friend of me, the friend of myself known as .....). 

Pronouns can be singular or plural. A single person is 'I'. More than one person is 'we'. He, she, it are singular pronouns, and in the plural they become 'they'. 'You' singular remains 'you' plural.

When the pronouns become objects of the sentence: "I" becomes "me"; "You" remains the same; "He" becomes "him"; "she" becomes "her"; "it" becomes "them"; "we" becomes "us"; "they" becomes "them". 

As in:

I am a girl. (first person singular) We are girls. (First person plural)
You are a girl. (second person singular) You are girls. (second person plural)
He is a boy. (third person singular). They are boys. (third person plural)
It is a cat. (third person singular) They are cats. (third person plural)
She is a teacher. (third person singular)  They are teachers. (third person plural.)
He plays football. (third person singular). They play football. (third person plural)
He goes to school. She goes to school. They (all) go to school.

He gives the ball to him.
I give the toy to you.
They give the toy to us.
We give the toy to them.
You take the toy from me.
She takes the toy from us.
This is my toy. This is your toy. This is his toy. This is her toy. This is their toy. These are his toys. These are their toys. These are our toys. 
This is the toy of me. This is the toy of you. This is thetoy of him. This is the toy of her. This is the toy of them. These are the toys belonging to him. These are the toys belonging to them. These are the toys belong to us. 

PLEASE NOTE: apostrophes NEVER indicate plurals!!! potato/potatoes; jelly/jellies; mother/mothers; toy/toys; 1960s; MP3s. Etc. I cringe when I see a sign saying 'Apple's for sale'. I always ask myself 'the apple's WHAT is for sale? What belonging to the apple is being sold? 

These are things I was taught in the first few years of my schooling. I studied it in much greater depth at university. It's a pity not much of this sort of thing is taught at any time these days.


----------



## Barbara L (Jan 9, 2007)

I think what it really boils down to is that this phrase (You're not the boss of me.) was started by kids.  Grammatically correct or not, they couldn't care less.  It sounded like a good comeback (and obviously was, since it caught on like wildfire), so they went with it.

 Barbara


----------



## Buck (Jan 9, 2007)

daisy.
Thanks for a nice tutorial.  Clearly you know your stuff.  Would that many more folks did.
Buck


----------



## Barbara L (Jan 9, 2007)

daisy said:
			
		

> Note: there is no apostrophe in the possessive "its". Take a close look at the following sentences. The apostrophe in the second sentence indicates a missing letter. It stands for 'i', as an 'It is'. 'It' is the pronoun which stands for 'the cat'.
> 
> PLEASE NOTE: apostrophes NEVER indicate plurals!!! potato/potatoes; jelly/jellies; mother/mothers; toy/toys; 1960s; MP3s. Etc. I cringe when I see a sign saying 'Apple's for sale'. I always ask myself 'the apple's WHAT is for sale? What belonging to the apple is being sold?


I have to admit these two things drive me nuts (well a lot of things regarding grammar and language usage do, but these are a couple biggies).  However, the one that sends me over the top is the incorrect usage of "I" when "me" is the correct choice.  For some reason many people think that using the word "me" is poor grammar and that "I" should always be used.  For instance, "Would you like to join my wife and I for dinner?"  I can feel the steam building in my head already, so I'd better finish this post!  LOL

 Barbara


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 9, 2007)

Daisy.  thanks for that detailed explanation.  The fact that I had to really concentrate to understand it makes me wish I had paid more attention in school.


----------



## Katie H (Jan 9, 2007)

Wow, Daisy, you touched on one of my pet peeves.  The incorrect use of the apostrophe.  For some unknown reason folks think that when there's more than one potato it should be spelled "potatoe's."  Makes me crazy.  I've even seen it used in grocery store ads, etc.  Using an apostrophe to pluralize makes me nuts.

I have worked as a copy editor and I always tried, nicely, to explain to those whose work I was reviewing why the apostrophe had to be inserted or removed, depending on the case.  Thankfully my explanations were received well.  Usually with "Oh, that's how it's done."

Fortunately I was blessed with great teacher's and instructor's whose job's were to teach me properly.  (Ugh, just typing the last sentence made my fingers twitch.)


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

Thank you all very much. This has been quite enlightening. My wife is also thrilled that she was correct


----------



## GB (Jan 9, 2007)

Barbara L said:
			
		

> I have to admit these two things drive me nuts (well a lot of things regarding grammar and language usage do, but these are a couple biggies).  However, the one that sends me over the top is the incorrect usage of "I" when "me" is the correct choice.  For some reason many people think that using the word "me" is poor grammar and that "I" should always be used.  For instance, "Would you like to join my wife and I for dinner?"  I can feel the steam building in my head already, so I'd better finish this post!  LOL
> 
> Barbara


Well let me be the first to say...

Me thank you


----------



## BlueCat (Jan 9, 2007)

Barbara L said:
			
		

> ... "Would you like to join my wife and I for dinner?" I can feel the steam building in my head already, so I'd better finish this post! LOL
> 
> Barbara


 
Hahaha!  That one makes me want to bite a table!

BC


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 9, 2007)

"You are not the boss of me" is grammatically fine. While some have pointed out that it might be a bit more awkward than "You are not my boss," the awkwardness here, I believe, serves a purpose, especially if you're a child. Think about it. Children are "me, me, me" creatures. So the emphasis in this construction is perfect for them. But yes, it is odd-sounding and wordy, so best left for kids. 

As for prepositions, the rule is that you are not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition.  But like all rules, tedious enforcement can make for some very stilted language; e.g., "For what are you looking," instead of "What are you looking for?" 

As someone already pointed out, Churchill is famous for his retort to a critic's comment about his ending sentences with prepositions, something to the effect of "That is criticism up with which I will not put." He was something, eh? When Lady Astor said,  "Winston, if you were                         my husband I would flavour your coffee with poison," he retorted, "Madam, if I were your husband, I should                         drink it."

A worse offense, though, is ending a sentence with an_ unnecessary_ preposition, as in "Where do you live at?" For many years I taught grammar, punctuation, vocabulary, and spelling to court reporting students (all adults) who needed very strong language skills to pass the state test. I used every trick in the book to make them comfortable learning what they had either totally forgotton or, sadly more likely, had never really learned in the first place.  I was not above pratfalls and relied on humor to get us all through the ordeal. So for the "Where do you live at?" problem, I would always pull out the old joke about the two women on an airplane. Unfortunately, the punch line is verboten here.


----------



## auntdot (Jan 9, 2007)

Wow, I am truly amazed. I never realized the grammatical knowledge of folks here.

Have worked in the sciences for many years but now own many books on grammar and usage; I refer to them often.  The older I get the more I want to understand the nuances of the English languaage.

Believe the answer to the initial question is that either one is acceptable. 

Agree with the apostrophe controversy, with perhaps one exception.

And that is I believe an apostrophe and its associated 's' can be used to form the pleural of letters, numerals, symbols.

Thus I believe "he crossed his t's and i's is correct usage".

As should be "he writes his 2's like 3's".

Or "folks use their &'s too casually and should just spell the word".

The use of punctuation has become somewhat simplified by the press that has tried to reduce it to a minimum for economic reasons.  

But I still think those uses of the apostrophe in constructing pleurals is correct.

Thanks folks, I needed this thread.


----------



## Barbara L (Jan 9, 2007)

GB said:
			
		

> Well let me be the first to say...
> 
> Me thank you


LOL  I was watching Wheel of Fortune tonight and a woman asked for "an 'u'!"  I thought maybe I had heard it wrong, but when I asked James he said he had heard it too.  Sheesh!

 Barbara


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 9, 2007)

suzyQ3 said:
			
		

> ...A worse offense, though, is ending a sentence with an_ unnecessary_ preposition, as in "Where do you live at?" ...


 

suzyQ3:

S.O.'s daughter and her family live in Florida where the extra preposition is a way of life.  It drives me crazy!  

Things such as, "Where's my book at?" make me cringe.  I try to correct the kids but don't see them enough to make it stick.


auntdot:

The unnecessary apostrophes (apostrophe's) are another pet peeve.  What is the justification for their being used in your examples?


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 9, 2007)

Andy M. said:
			
		

> suzyQ3:
> 
> S.O.'s daughter and her family live in Florida where the extra preposition is a way of life.  It drives me crazy!
> 
> ...


Andy M, regarding auntdot's apostrophes:  In the old days, an apostrophe was used routinely to pluralize letters, abbreviations, and numbers. If you still prefer to do so, it is a matter of style. 

The newer style, however,  is to use an apostrophe only if clarity is at risk. In other words, if one is pluralizing lowercase letters, one would use an apostrophe. Lowercase abbreviations demand an apostrophe. If one is pluralizing an uppercase abbreviation or acronym that would, without an apostrophe, look like a word, one would use an apostrophe.   In any case in which pluralizing a letter or abbreviation would create confusion, then use an apostrophe. Otherwise, forgo the apostrophe, and that would include the pluralizing of digits.

I highly recommend the Gregg Reference Manual.


----------



## skilletlicker (Jan 10, 2007)

I thought I'd mention this.  In spite of the strong opinions expressed in this thread, I can't recall a single instance of any poster's grammar, punctuation, or spelling being directly criticized.  I participate in a forum about the Memphis Grizzlies and am strongly tempted to post examples from there of fractured English and brutally direct criticism, often in the same post.

Thanks to everyone for so patiently tolerating my many errors.

By the way, how about somebody starting a tutorial thread about punctuation, especially the use of the comma.


----------



## Dove (Jan 10, 2007)

Wow!! My head is spinning. Lets just sum it all up with

GB,
I'm glad you like us proper Grammers....


----------



## skilletlicker (Jan 10, 2007)

daisy said:
			
		

> ...It's such a mobile language - nothing stays the same for long. But, there are *some rules that are unbreakable*, and I'll fight to my last gasp to uphold them! ...
> 
> * I think we can get away with a lot of rule-breaking in conversation, but when it's in print, I think we should be a little more careful.
> * ...


 In the context of your comments, I believe posts in a forum such as this one fall into the conversation category.  Don't you agree?


----------



## XeniA (Jan 10, 2007)

daisy said:
			
		

> Sorry, there are NO exceptions to the lack of apostrophes in plurals.
> 
> You should mind your Ps and Qs, and cross all your Ts and dot all your Is. And you should line up in 2s and 3s, and not use too many &s.


Ah, but there are experts who do not agree with you, who'd say there's never a hard and fast rule where clarity's at stake:



> Apostrophes are often used to create plurals. Use an apostrophe when its  omission (er, I mean the omission of it) would confuse the reader, such as  "Jimmy gets all straight As." Huh? So, okay, he gets straight A's. But he can  certainly learn his ABCs, rather than his ABC's. No confusion, no apostrophe.


The link to that quote (a very clearly written page in general) is:  Tools of the Trade


----------



## XeniA (Jan 10, 2007)

suzyQ3 said:
			
		

> "You are not the boss of me" is grammatically fine. While some have pointed out that it might be a bit more awkward than "You are not my boss," the awkwardness here, I believe, serves a purpose, especially if you're a child. Think about it. Children are "me, me, me" creatures. So the emphasis in this construction is perfect for them. But yes, it is odd-sounding and wordy, so best left for kids.


 I found a couple of comments on the differences between these structures which I thought were relevant. Both agreed that the "of" structure was equivalent to the "my" (or other possessive) structure, but that each could subtly change the meaning of the sentence. Here's the first comment:

_



			"Always be aware of the meaning you wish to convey, whether the object of an  action or the possessor of an object. Compare "Jim's painting" and "the painting  of Jim's." Did he paint it? Or does he own it?"
		
Click to expand...

_The other comment gave these two examples:

1.  _"The name of the dog" 
2.  "The dog's name"_

noting that there was a difference in _emphasis_ with the two structures, the first emphasizing the _name_ and the second, the _dog_.

Seems to me this could easily be applied to "the boss of me" and "my boss," the first emphasizing -- as kids would wish to! -- that the person they're speaking to isn't their boss, i.e., that they're equals ("you're not the _boss_ of me").

The use of "you're not my boss" on the other hand, doesn't negate the possibility that the person they're speaking to is a boss, but emphasizes either that that person isn't the boss of the speaker per se ("you're not _my_ boss"), or, that the relationship the two people have is not that of boss and subordinate ("you're not my _boss_").

I admit they're awfully close, however, and I really think you'd need to hear the spoken emphasis (or use italics in writing) to be absolutely certain of the meaning!



			
				suzyQ3 said:
			
		

> I was not above pratfalls and relied on humor to get us all through the ordeal. So for the "Where do you live at?" problem, I would always pull out the old joke about the two women on an airplane. Unfortunately, the punch line is verboten here.


 Completely unfair, you tease, you!


----------



## Robo410 (Jan 10, 2007)

another grammar policeman here ...


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 10, 2007)

_Sorry, there are NO exceptions to the lack of apostrophes in plurals.

You should mind your Ps and Qs, and cross all your Ts and dot all your Is. And you should line up in 2s and 3s, and not use too many &s._ 

Ah, but  Daisy, your own example belies your absolute. Your "Is" is not clear and is actually considered a punctuation error.

For clarity, the plural of lowercase abbreviations with internal periods (c.o.d.) and lowercase letters require an apostrophe, as do the capital letters A, I, M, and U. Uppercase abbreviations and acronyms are clearly read without the apostrophe.

The plural of words beings used simply as words usually don't require an apostrophe (ifs, and, and buts) unless there might be confusion (too many "that's" in the paragraph). 

Numbers (digits) do not require an apostrophe.

Having said all that, some old-fashioned grammarians still sanction the use of the apostrophe to form the plurals of _all_ letters, abbreviations, and numbers. Newer style dictates  its use only for functional necessity. 

So the upshot is that you are not wrong if you choose always to use the apostrophe to form these particular plurals. I prefer the newer style myself and use only those that are required for clarity.


----------



## YT2095 (Jan 10, 2007)

I Think (and I could be wrong), the problem is right at the end with the last 2 words "of me"

if we think of the word "me" and the types of words that go before it normaly "to" "from" "past" "over" etc...
they imply an action almost, "ME" is also quite third party sounding too.

the "OF" doesn`t mix well with it as a result, "Of MINE" is cool, "to ME" is also cool.

I know what I`m trying to get across, but it`s very hard to explain ))
an English teacher Im not!


----------



## GB (Jan 10, 2007)

Since this has become a general discussion of grammar, I feel I need to share with all you grammar lovers a passage from one of my favorite books, The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe by Douglas Adams. I hope you find this as entertaining as I do.



> The Restaurant at the End of the Universe is one of the most extraordinary ventures in the entire history of catering. It has been built on the fragmented remains of ... it will be built on the fragmented ... that is to say it will have been built by this time, and indeed has been -
> 
> One of the major problems encountered in time travel is not that of accidentally becoming your own father or mother. There is no problem involved in becoming your own father or mother that a broadminded and well-adjusted family can't cope with. There is also no problem about changing the course of history - the course of history does not change because it all fits together like a jigsaw. All the important changes have happened before the things they were supposed to change and it all sorts itself out in the end.
> 
> ...



OK back to discussing grammar


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 10, 2007)

I have to go lie down now.


----------



## XeniA (Jan 10, 2007)

Robo410 said:
			
		

> another grammar policeman here ...


Robo, is this meant to be as rudely critical as it sounds? To whom was it aimed?


----------



## Veloce (Jan 10, 2007)

"_You are (or are not) the X of me_" is gramatically fine. It is just not standard idiomatic English. The standard form is "_You are (or are not) my X._" We don't say "_You are the teacher of me,_" we say "_You are my teacher._" We don't say "_You are not the mother of me,_" we say "_You are not my mother._"


----------



## GB (Jan 10, 2007)

Ayrton, I took Robo's comment to mean that he considers himself a grammar policeman.


----------



## boufa06 (Jan 10, 2007)

Andy M. said:
			
		

> I have to go lie down now.


----------



## Robo410 (Jan 10, 2007)

Ayrton said:
			
		

> Robo, is this meant to be as rudely critical as it sounds? To whom was it aimed?


 
No, it is not.  I am a high school English teacher and my students call me the Grammar Police.  I was reading the comments in this thread and one of them was about all the grammar knowledge being shared.  I was just adding to that.  Obviously, my terseness led to misunderstanding, and for that I appologize.


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 10, 2007)

Robo410 said:
			
		

> No, it is not.  I am a high school English teacher and my students call me the Grammar Police.  I was reading the comments in this thread and one of them was about all the grammar knowledge being shared.  I was just adding to that.  Obviously, my terseness led to misunderstanding, and for that I appologize.


Thanks for the clarification, Robo. I, too, misunderstood and thought you were referring to another poster. 

I don't know about you, but I have been very careful not to set myself up as the Grand Duchess of Everything That is Grammar. Of course, I have always taught adults, and if they even get a whiff of such pretension, they'll spend the majority of time looking for **chinks in the armor. 

So I'd always tell them that I can answer the vast majority of their questions involving grammar or punctuation with certainty but that if one of them caught me off guard, I would try my hardest to find out the right one and bring it to them, with humility. That seemed to work best for me.

**We could do a whole thread on idioms and confused word pairs and how often they are either not known or misunderstood. I actually had to teach a whole session on this topic so that my future court reporters would not transcribe something like "for all intensive purposes" instead of "for all intents and purposes" or the infamous "bird in the poof" for "burden of proof" that ended up in a finished court transcript.


----------



## Dove (Jan 10, 2007)

I would like to see an end to this thread. Someone is going to have hurt feeling if this continues.

I make more mistakes on here than anyone and I sure hope I don't get picked on. This site helps me keep my sanity..if you are new here and don't understand that...then take the time to read my past posts.
Marge~Dove


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 10, 2007)

Dove said:
			
		

> I would like to see an end to this thread. Someone is going to have hurt feeling if this continues.
> 
> I make more mistakes on here than anyone and I sure hope I don't get picked on. This site helps me keep my sanity..if you are new here and don't understand that...then take the time to read my past posts.
> Marge~Dove


Did I miss something? Has anyone been abusive on this thread? The one post that appeared to be was actually not at all, and that was clarified by the poster himself.

Please, please, let's not close a  discussion unless it's absolutely necessary because of a violation of site rules.  

After all, there is ALWAYS the POSSIBILITY of hurt feelings. If they occur, then let's deal with it.


----------



## Dove (Jan 10, 2007)

Then go for it..just keep on letting me make mistakes..


----------



## Barbara L (Jan 10, 2007)

Dove said:
			
		

> Then go for it..just keep on letting me make mistakes..


All I know is whether Grandma Dove says, "I am taking you behind the woodshed" or "I is taking you behind the woodshed," I'd better get behind the woodshed!     

 Barbara


----------



## Constance (Jan 10, 2007)

English was one of my majors in college, and my mother was a school teacher, so it shouldn't be surprising that I have alway been very picky about speaking correctly. 
Thing being, I have also worked with the public most of my life. There are certain phrases and expressions that fall into the category that is given "poetic license". 

The phrase, more accuratly quoted as, "You ain't the boss'a ME," I believe, falls into that catagory. To correct the English would take away from the raw meaning of the phrase.


----------



## StirBlue (Jan 10, 2007)

"You are not the boss of me"  is typically used by preschoolers.  
   When and why have you heard a 3-4-5 year old say this?  

example:  Mom is checking out groceries and a stranger standing behind your cart tells your child to sit down (meaning to stay seated in the cart seat) or tells your child not to touch stuff on the shelves in the checkout isle.  

This child knows who is responsible for them (child) and who makes the rules for them.  

What could they say instead:  butt out!


----------



## Andy M. (Jan 10, 2007)

suzyQ3 said:
			
		

> ... "for all intensive purposes" instead of "for all intents and purposes" or the infamous "bird in the poof" for "burden of proof" that ended up in a finished court transcript.


 

My favorite came from an interoffice memo that included a list of issues that had caused problems.  The last item on the list was, "add in for item" in place of ad infinitum.


----------



## XeniA (Jan 11, 2007)

Robo410 said:
			
		

> No, it is not. I am a high school English teacher and my students call me the Grammar Police. I was reading the comments in this thread and one of them was about all the grammar knowledge being shared. I was just adding to that. Obviously, my terseness led to misunderstanding, and for that I appologize.


GB, Robo, Suzy -- thanks for clarifying. Robo, as you know from my PM, I knew there was a possibility I'd got it wrong. Sorry!


----------



## XeniA (Jan 11, 2007)

GB said:
			
		

> Since this has become a general discussion of grammar, I feel I need to share with all you grammar lovers a passage from one of my favorite books, The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe by Douglas Adams. I hope you find this as entertaining as I do....OK back to discussing grammar


 
As long as the whole book doesn't go on like that!! (Reminds me of trying to read "Watership Down" where one has to learn bunny language to proceed. I think I read the first 10 or so pages several times, then left it for good. I guess I just don't do bunny ...)


----------



## XeniA (Jan 11, 2007)

suzyQ3 said:
			
		

> Did I miss something? Has anyone been abusive on this thread? The one post that appeared to be was actually not at all, and that was clarified by the poster himself.
> 
> Please, please, let's not close a discussion unless it's absolutely necessary because of a violation of site rules.
> 
> After all, there is ALWAYS the POSSIBILITY of hurt feelings. If they occur, then let's deal with it.


Here, here Suzy! I can add nothing other than my applause!


----------



## XeniA (Jan 11, 2007)

StirBlue said:
			
		

> "You are not the boss of me" is typically used by preschoolers.
> When and why have you heard a 3-4-5 year old say this?
> 
> example: Mom is checking out groceries and a stranger standing behind your cart tells your child to sit down (meaning to stay seated in the cart seat) or tells your child not to touch stuff on the shelves in the checkout isle.
> ...


I have to admit that I wouldn't like to hear this said from a child to an adult, certainly not a stranger. It strikes me as badly impertinent!

Child-to-child I buy, but as I'd tried to say before, to me it should be used to establish the "equalness" of two equals, so isn't appropriate child to adult or subordinate to boss.

Mind you, that really wasn't the question, was it?!


----------



## Barbara L (Jan 11, 2007)

Ayrton said:
			
		

> As long as the whole book doesn't go on like that!! (Reminds me of trying to read "Watership Down" where one has to learn bunny language to proceed. I think I read the first 10 or so pages several times, then left it for good. I guess I just don't do bunny ...)


I read "Watership Down" years ago and loved it (I want to read it again soon). The weird thing was that before I knew it, I could actually understand the bunny language!

 Barbara


----------



## XeniA (Jan 11, 2007)

Barbara L said:
			
		

> I read "Watership Down" years ago and loved it (I want to read it again soon). The weird thing was that before I knew it, I could actually understand the bunny language!
> 
> Barbara


 
Well ... bless your twitching little whiskers, then, Barbara!!  You're a far stronger bunny than I!


----------



## GB (Jan 11, 2007)

LOL no Ayrton the book does not go on like that. What you read there is the extent of it.

Give Watership Down another chance if you feel up for it. It was on of my favorite books ever.


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 29, 2007)

GB said:
			
		

> So my wife and I were talking last night and the phase "you are not the boss of me" came up. I remember being a kid and all the kids would say that. We would always get corrected though and told it should be "you are not my boss" instead.
> 
> Well now that I am older and actually care about proper grammar, I would like to know what the reason is behind this. My wife asked me and I did not know. I felt kind of dumb actually because I started to question if it even was wrong or if the adults at the time were just teaching us incorrectly. You are not the boss of me just does not sound right to me ear, but is it actually grammatically incorrect and if so, why?


GB, I thought of you when I read a review in today's Los Angeles Times of a new book entitled -- ta-da -- "You're Not the Boss of Me,"  a wicked send-up of motherhood by Erika Schikel. 

Since I think you have to be registered to access that part of the online LAT, here's a link to the book on Amazon: Amazon.com: You're Not The Boss Of Me: Adventures Of A Modern Mom: Books: Erika Schickel


----------



## Constance (Jan 29, 2007)

If one of my children had said that to me, I would have slapped them in the face. Sometimes, there are just things you have to do.


----------



## lulu (Jan 30, 2007)

I love you all, lol.

As regards patience and errors is posting on a forum (Skilletlicker's point) I feel that what we type here is in essence conversation.  Using emoticons and incorrect sentence structure is a reinforcment of the feeling behind the words that, without absolute precision of word choice and grammatical usage, could risk being lost especially when you consider the number of people who particpate in a language that is not their mother tongue, ages, etc of posters.  I frequently have moments posting when I am reminded that the Americans and the English (and indeed, the British) are nations divided by our common language.  DH works for an American firm, with UK qualifications in an international setting.  The firm standard is American English, his requirements are to write in UK recognised English, obviously remaining consistant.  Thus, the poor, beleaguered Italian proof readers get headaches.  I had formative education in both US and UK systems, and so there are times when I have to stop and think over simple words for spellings.

I was taught to ask "For what are you looking?" and probably still would with my parents or my husband's father but in conversation with my husband or contempories I would always say "What are you looking for?".  I regret a general loss of the importance of choosing the right words and using them properly.  English (all English, in all countries) is a remarkable language.  I speak (badly) four languages now, and I am always amazed by the precision of the English language and the breadth of the vocabulary available to speakers of English.  As I get older I regret my own lack of perfection and in daily usage strive to improve.  All that said, online there are times when I feel abbreviations are more relevant and I rarely go back to change typos, they are the typing equivalent of stumbling over words or living language.  I also heavily over use punctuation!!!!!


----------



## karadekoolaid (Jan 30, 2007)

You're not the boss of me vs you're not my boss. 
After teaching English as a Foreign Language for many years, I can assure you there's no _grammatical _difference as such. What we _do _have here is Usage and Abusage. The second version, which sounds most correct to the majority on this thread, is simply custom - called collocation in the(correct?) use of English grammar. It's like saying "black and white", instead of "white and black", or "Chips and Fish" instead of "Fish and Chips". 

A comment on the preposition at the end of a sentence. 
Again, it's usage which dictates the final result. Winston Churchill was once chided for using a preposition at the end of a sentence, to which he retorted: 
" Sir, that is the sort of nonsense up with which I shall not put"...

The good thing about English is that it's a living language, unshackled by stuffy Academies or inflexible rules. 

Now I'm quickly going kitchenwards post haste in order to egg-break and sausage-grill for the purpose of fattening up on...


----------



## Half Baked (Jan 30, 2007)

Lol Clive....you always things in a nutshell put

I just can't tolerate, "My bad".  It's hard not to jump up and choke the kid and now I hear adults using it....*run screaming out of the room*


----------



## suzyQ3 (Jan 30, 2007)

Oops, didn't mean to resurrect this long and comprehensive thread. I just thought GB in particular might find it amusing that a new book has that title. 

Note to self: PMs are my friend.


----------



## VeraBlue (Jan 30, 2007)

*You know what???*

Yes I am.


----------



## QSis (Jan 30, 2007)

Oh, this is FANTASTIC!!!  I absolutely LOVE having Grammar Police around, since so many spoken and written phrases drive me nuts!

SuzyQ, Robo and others: what's the deal with "gone missing"?  Even newscasters are reporting that a person has "gone missing", instead of "has been missing".

Am I just behind the grammatical times?

Lee


----------



## JDP (Jan 30, 2007)

Wow, I saw this thread earlier and never thought it would go this long. But in the immortal words of Rodney King, "Get along, can't we all?"  I live in the land of sentences ending in preposisions and find them very funny. Such as:

Do you want to go fishing erno ( or no) ?
She/ He was so hot, nowatimsayin (you know what I'm saying)?

 One thing that drives me nuts, and maybe this should be in the venting thread, is the complete misuse of the word myself. I have co-workers that use it regularly because they think it makes them sound smart. I also hear it from time to time from talk show hosts. The bottom line is we can all talk like hicks but cooking we love to do.

See ya in another thread,

JDP


----------

