We the People, or…?
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
We the People, or…?
For much of the last two months, we have been analyzing why the subject pronouns I, he, she, we, they and the object pronouns me, him, her, us, them are chronically misused and confused.
In this final installment, we’ll deal with flawed sentences like Politicians should respect we the people and It’s a happy outcome for he who laughs last.
Formal writing requires “us the people” (object of respect) and “him who laughs last” (object of for), even though we instinctively resist tampering with venerable expressions like we the people and he who laughs last.
If being correct would ruin the mood, there may be creative ways around the grammatical buzzkill. In the first case, we could probably avoid censure by using capitals: Politicians should respect We the People. This signals the reader that the well-known phrase is sacrosanct and must not be altered.
In the second example, we could write: a happy outcome for “he who laughs last.” The quotation marks grant the words special dispensation, like the title of a book or movie.
So now, here is a summary of the chief causes of pronoun confusion.
- All forms of the verb to be. Informal sentences (It was me, It must have been them, It seems to be her) wrongly use object pronouns instead of what are called subject complements. (The correct pronouns respectively would be I, they, and she.)
- Compound subjects and compound objects. In everyday speech, when and or or links a pronoun with other nouns or pronouns, the results are often ungrammatical: Joe and him went fishing, Sue invited my friend and I for dinner, Her or I will meet you there. (The correct pronouns respectively would be he, me, and she.)
- Comparative sentences using as or than. Sentences like You’re as smart as her and Eddie ran faster than them sound fine but are technically flawed. (The correct pronouns respectively would be she and they.)
- Infinitives and verbs ending in –ing. They change subjects to objects. An infinitive such as to be turns I believe he is honest into I believe him to be honest. A verb ending in –ing, such as going, gives us the option of saying either I saw he was going home or I saw him going home. This can be especially confusing with compound subjects and objects, or when who-whom is involved.
- Idiomatic phrases containing subject pronouns (we the people, he who laughs last).
Pop Quiz
Correct any sentences that are formally ungrammatical.
1. LaTroy knew it was him who everyone preferred.
2. According to witnesses, it had to have been we.
3. The receipts were always safe with Maria and I.
4. May him and his friend join us for a nightcap?
5. She’s every bit as confused as me.
6. Your cousin’s wife looks older than he.
7. Who do you suspect was hiding something?
8. Who do you suspect to be hiding something?
9. This has been a hard week for we residents of California.
10. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Pop Quiz Answers
1. LaTroy knew it was he whom everyone preferred.
2. According to witnesses, it had to have been we. CORRECT
3. The receipts were always safe with Maria and me.
4. May he and his friend join us for a nightcap?
5. She’s every bit as confused as I.
6. Your cousin’s wife looks older than he. CORRECT
7. Who do you suspect was hiding something? CORRECT
8. Whom do you suspect to be hiding something?
9. This has been a hard week for us residents of California.
10. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
If the article or the existing discussions do not address a thought or question you have on the subject, please use the "Comment" box at the bottom of this page.
How do you figure the preamble of the Constitution should really begin “Us the people”? We the people….do… It’s the subject of the sentence, and the last time I looked in a grammar book, “us” is the object, not the subject.
We’re afraid you have misinterpreted the point of the article. We are not talking about We the people as correctly used as a subject in the opening of the Constitution. As pointed out in the second paragraph, we are referring to the flawed sentence, Politicians should respect we the people, where it is clearly an object of the word respect. It is certainly not correct to say “Politicians should respect we.” Rather, it should be Politicians should respect us.
Great series-good idea, thanks.
We’re happy to hear you’ve liked the series.
If I’m still wrong on this one, I’ll hang up my gavel.
The construct “We the People” makes no logical sense. Grammatically, it should be “We, the people…” because “the people” is an extra piece of information clarifying who “We” is. And in that, the use of “We” is correct, because it is “We” not “Us” who “do ordain this Constitution.”
Similarly, the phrase “It’s a happy outcome for he who laughs last” is using a function “he who laughs last” to return the object. The use of “he” applies to who is laughing last, not for whom the happy outcome is.
The happy outcome is for [Person1 (whom)]
[Person1]=Function(“he who laughs last”)
As with a previous writer, we’re afraid you have misinterpreted the point of the article. We are not talking about We the people as correctly used as a subject in the opening of the Constitution. As pointed out in the second paragraph, we are referring to the flawed sentence, Politicians should respect we the people, where it is clearly an object of the word respect. It is certainly not correct to say “Politicians should respect we.” Rather, it should be Politicians should respect us.
The writers of the Constitution were also correct in writing We the people not We, the people because the people is essential information. Essential information is not set off by commas.
Also, your views on “he who” are in opposition to those of every English authority alive.
Thanks for writing. It’s been interesting reflecting on your perspective.
To make Matt S. happy (for using a subjective pronoun), Jane happy (for grammatical correctness), and me happy (for applying a lesson I learned from a blog post a while back), how about I propose the following:
“It’s a happy outcome for whoever laughs last!”
I included an exclamation point because we are all happy, and I have one additional question. Which is correct:
“…one additional question. Which is correct:”
“…one additional question: Which is correct?”
“…one additional question. Which is correct?:”
Other not listed?!?
Thanks for your grammatical assistance.
Yes, that’s a happy outcome!
Your second question is in a gray area. A writer or editor must decide between a colon and a question mark, because using both, as in your third alternative, is clunky. The issue is clarity. The sentence “Which is correct:” is obviously a question, but one could defend the colon. If what comes after the word correct is short, the question mark would come at the end.
Example:
I have one additional question: Which is correct, who or whom? (Since what comes after the colon is a complete sentence, capitalization of which is advised, but optional.)
However, what do we do when what comes after the word correct is a listing of items? Since questions need question marks, we do not believe that the lack of a colon would be confusing to people.
Example:
I have one additional question. Which is correct? OR I have one additional question: Which is correct?
1. It’s a happy outcome for he who laughs last!
2. It’s a happy outcome for he whom laughs last!
3. It’s a happy outcome for him who laughs last!
4. It’s a happy outcome for whoever laughs last!
I am confused whether I should use the word ‘who’ or ‘whom’ in my sentence. Please help. My sentence is, “Do no use your power against whom gave you the ability to stand on your feet.”
Is it correct or I should replace the word ‘whom’ with a ‘who’?
The rules and guidelines covering who vs. whom are contained on our website at GrammarBook.com. There you will discover that, if properly written, your sentence should be “Do not use your power against those who gave you the ability to stand on your feet.” (The pronoun those could be changed to person, persons, him, or her according to your intention.)
I looked through the grammarbook website to find usage of ‘before’ with pronouns but couldn’t find much information.
Which of the following sentences will be correct:
They did it before us.
They did it before we.
Peter completed the race before me.
Peter completed the race before I.
Please let me know if the pronoun usage with the word ‘before’ is similar to that with the word ‘than’.
Sentences 1 and 3 are correct because the objective case pronouns us and me are objects of the preposition before. Sentences 2 and 4 would be correct if we add the verb did to each sentence, which turns the preposition before into a conjunction:
2. They did it before we did.
4. Peter completed the race before I did.
So ‘before’ doesn’t work the same way as ‘than’, right?
The correct usages of ‘than’ are ‘he is better than I’ and ‘he is better than I am’?
Yes, than is generally considered a conjunction, therefore he is better than I and he is better than I am are correct.
Which is correct?
To enable we third agers to remember…..
To enable us third agers to remember
The object pronoun us is correct.
“…technically flawed. (The correct pronouns respectively would be she and they.)”
This has been debated to death for centuries.
In English if the only thing following “than” is a pronoun, the most natural form is the object (accusative) form, just as it would be if we were using a preposition like “above” or “of”. After all “Eddie was above them” is just another way of saying “Eddie was higher than them”. We don’t have a preposition meaning “faster than” but logically, if Eddie was faster than them, then at the finish line Eddie was in front of them.
Our post Picking Proper Pronouns: Part I says, “In comparisons introduced by words such as than or as, the case of a pronoun following the comparative word is determined by whether the pronoun completes an omitted, understood clause.” Therefore, we prefer “Eddie ran faster than they (did).”
It would be “Eddie was higher than they,” not them. The word “than” is not a preposition, so you use the nominative case, not the objective.
2. According to witnesses, it had to have been we. CORRECT
I disagree. I was taught long ago (and later taught my students) that the subject and object of any verbal—even the verb “to be”—is in the objective case. Constructions like “I wanted her to be him” are thus preferable to the more grating “I wanted she to be he.” (In the first “her” is the subject of the infinitive; him is the object.) In addition, “He found me cooking” is correct even though “me” is the subject of the gerund.” (If the old song “It Had to Be You” were transmogrified into a first person lament, “It Had to Be Me” would be my choice.)
You may wish to review the principles we’ve presented in the five subject and object pronoun posts we’ve provided every other week recently. If you go back to I Subject Your Honor of August 26, 2020, you’ll see that “…it had to have been we” is formally correct, not “… it had to have been us” because we wouldn’t say “us had to have been it.”
Further, likening “it had to have been we” to “I wanted she to be he” is a false comparison. “I wanted she to be he” is not only grating, it’s incorrect. In the sentence “I wanted her to be him,” her is in the object case because it’s the object of the verb wanted. And thus him must be in the object case to agree with the objective her.
I am sorry if I’m posting in the wrong place, but I could not find another appropriate site.
Q: I’ve noticed this year in many newspaper reports, the word “black,” when describing a person is capitalized. Then I noticed that “white” person is also being capitalized. Is it correct to capitalize the adjectives “black” or “white” when referring to people?
We have written many posts dealing with capitalization, but none that deal directly with your question, so we’ll respond here.
The Chicago Manual of Style’s Rule 8.38 says, “Black is increasingly capitalized when referring to racial or ethnic identity. As a matter of editorial consistency, similar terms such as White may also be capitalized when used in this sense. Usage varies according to context, however, and individual preferences should be respected.”
AP Stylebook says, “Use the capitalized term as an adjective in a racial, ethnic or cultural sense: Black people, Black culture, Black literature, Black studies, Black colleges.” AP Stylebook does not currently capitalize the word white as an adjective describing a person.
For clarity, I would rewrite your example sentence “I saw him going home” to specify who was going home: the speaker, or the person seen by the speaker.
We see what you’re saying. However, as written the example clearly conveys the point we are trying to make about verbs ending in –ing.
I read in the main article on subject-verb agreement that, “Rule 1. A subject will come before a phrase beginning with ‘of’.”
However, in this example I believe the verb applies to the phrase that comes after the phrase beginning with “of”: “The list of arbitrary restrictions goes on, and anyone who violates it risks fines or jail time.”
I believe that it is the “arbitrary restrictions” that are being violated, not the “list,” and that it should read “The list of arbitrary restrictions goes on, and anyone who violates them risks fines or jail time.”
I appreciate your assistance very much!
You seem to be in agreement with our Rule 1 in that the verb goes is the correct choice in combination with the singular subject list. What it appears you are questioning is noun-pronoun agreement between either list–it or restrictions–them. One thing this indicates is that the meaning of the sentence is unclear. What is it that one must violate in order to risk fines or jail: the entire list, one of its arbitrary restrictions, a combination of arbitrary restrictions, all of the arbitrary restrictions? Guessing at what may have been intended, a possible solution could be to replace the general pronoun with specific wording:
The list of arbitrary restrictions goes on, and anyone who violates any of the restrictions risks fines or jail time.
I haven’t read all of the comments, so perhaps I am being redundant with my suggestion. I like the alternatives offered of using capitals and quotation marks, but to use the phrase as the object of a preposition, what would be wrong with just eliminating the pronoun entirely and using “the people” as an object of the preposition?
We agree that writing a statement such as “politicians should answer before the people” is more efficient and grammatical than “politicians should answer before we the people.” In a conversational or less formal context, some writers might include “we the people” for an emphasis that would be understood although grammatically incorrect.