|
|
It's "taller than I" not "taller than me"
It's important not to confuse "I" and "me" in this situation, because:
"my girlfriend likes pizza more than I" "my girlfriend likes pizza more than me" These have different meanings.
<<These have different meanings. >>
Paul, Good Point! I never realized this before. Now I have ammo for when someone wants to flite with me about when "than" is a preposition (which it is not, IMO)
formal: It is I, better than I, whom did you see?
informal: It's me, better than me, who did you see? formal: I do not like it. Neither do I! informal: I don't like it. Me neither! neutral: Jane and I went to the store. informal: Me and Jane went to the store.
Hm... I've never heard the third informal example used by anybody besides ESL students and teenagers. Are you sure about it?
<<Hm... I've never heard the third informal example used by anybody besides ESL students and teenagers. Are you sure about it?>>
I've heard people in their 30s to 90s use it.
<<informal: Me and Jane went to the store. >>
I have to admit (almost ashamedly) that I brook such phrases all the time.
Your title example and the one you actually discuss are completely different. Are you seriously telling me you can't tell the difference between "He is taller than I/me" and "He likes pizza more than I/me"? "He is taller than me" is correct. "He is taller than I" is incorrect without assuming an elliptical verb.
CID: On what possible basis can you say that "than" is not a preposition? And what is "flite" supposed to mean? Is that supposed to be "fight"?
<<On what possible basis can you say that "than" is not a preposition?>>
On an historical one. "Than", when used correctly, is a conjunction. If it's going to be a preposition, then it must act as a preposition at ALL time, not when it feels like it. Prepositions signal the object case. If I say "He is taller than I am", "He is taller than I", then it is not a preposition. And what is "flite" supposed to mean? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flite
<<On an historical one.>>
Huh? For that to be a legitimate basis, you would have to both establish that it has not historically been used as a preposition, and that past usage is somehow controlling. I don't believe that you can do either. I'm no linguist, but I'd be really surprised if there were any historical period in which "than" was clearly established as a conjunction and not a preposition. <<"Than", when used correctly, is a conjunction.>> You're just begging the question. Your argument is that "taller than me" is wrong because "than" is a conjunction, and you're arguing that "than" is a conjunction because "taller than me" is wrong. <<If it's going to be a preposition, then it must act as a preposition at ALL time, not when it feels like it.>> If you seriously believe that each word has to be one and exactly one part of speech, then you really don't understand English. What part of speech is "smoke"? What part of speech is "like"? <<Prepositions signal the object case. If I say "He is taller than I am", "He is taller than I", then it is not a preposition. >> The case of a clause does not have to match the case of all the words in that clause. Take, for instance "He wrote the book that I like". The clause "the book that I like" is the object of the verb "wrote", yet "I" is in the subjective case. The sentence "He is taller than I am" can be understood as being elliptical for "He is taller than the height I am", "the height that I am" being the object of the preposition "than". If you want to pretend that "than" in a conjunction, you'll have to go through linguistic contortions to explain why the conjoined clauses are not in parallel construction. Normally, when one has a conjunction, the clauses have to match up. "I like swimming and hiking" or "I like to swim and hike", but not "I like swimming and to hike". So if "than" is a conjunction, why is the standard usage not "He is tall more than I am tall"? Do you see why the title of this thread doesn't match the example given? The sentence analogous to "My girlfriend likes pizza more than I [do]" is not "He is taller than I [am]", but "He is tall more than I am [tall]". In the sentence "He is taller than I am", what clauses are being conjoined? How about "Five is larger than three"?
<<Huh? For that to be a legitimate basis, you would have to both establish that it has not historically been used as a preposition, and that past usage is somehow controlling. I don't believe that you can do either. I'm no linguist, but I'd be really surprised if there were any historical period in which "than" was clearly established as a conjunction and not a preposition. >>
Oh that's nifty of you. Just give me something impossible to do ;) Below are Old English examples showing that it is clearly employed as a conjunction, because it is followed by a new independent clause, even if it is only a single pronoun in the nominative case: Hé wæs ǣr þonne ic, Jn. Skt. 1, 15. = He was earlier than I (nominative case) Gé synt sélran þonne manega spearuan, Mt. Kmbl. 10, 31. = Ye are better than many sparrows (nominative case) Ðé wæs leófra his sibb and hyldo þonne ðín sylfes bearn, Cd. Th. 176, 34; Gen. 2921: Andr. Kmbl. 2856; An. 1430. = Therefore [he] was most beloved of his relations and grace than thine own child (nominative) Leófre ys ús beón beswungen for láre þænne hit ne cunnan, Coll. Monast. Th. 18, 20: 24, 23. (1 a) where there is a negative with the comparative Seó is brádre þonne ǣnig man ofer seón mæge =She (it) is broader than any man can look over/see across <<You're just begging the question. Your argument is that "taller than me" is wrong because "than" is a conjunction, and you're arguing that "than" is a conjunction because "taller than me" is wrong. >> um, no. But you cannot prove that it is rightly a preposition, and don't say because it is followed by the object case as a reason! A preposition, by definition, introduces a propositional phrase and forces the object of the preposition to an oblique position. In "than me", me is not semantically oblique, though the form "me" is attempting to indicate it. It's not succeeding. He is than the house? I ran than that bookshelf? I put the book than the table? --hmm. <<<<If it's going to be a preposition, then it must act as a preposition at ALL time, not when it feels like it.>> If you seriously believe that each word has to be one and exactly one part of speech, then you really don't understand English. What part of speech is "smoke"? What part of speech is "like"? >> You err. I am not speaking about a word changing part of speech, as when the noun "party" becomes a verb "to party",,, When "party" is a noun, it is always a noun; when it's a verb, it is always a verb, right? But when you say: 1). He is taller than me AND/OR 2). He is taller than I am you are actually making two exceptions for the word "than" functioning as the same part of speech. When employed in the same function, it cannot be a preposition (first example), then a conjunction (second example). This is the flip-flop I am talking about. Does this make sense to you? <<The case of a clause does not have to match the case of all the words in that clause. Take, for instance "He wrote the book that I like". The clause "the book that I like" is the object of the verb "wrote", yet "I" is in the subjective case. >> Your sentence is analyzed this way,a nd doesn't really fit the situation: He (subject1) wrote (verb1) the book (object) - that (reflex pronoun) I (subject2) like (verb2) "that I like" is a dependent clause. It is not a sentence. This construction was originally derived from this type of scenario: "He wrote the book, [and] that book I like" Guess what--a conjunction! <<If you want to pretend that "than" in a conjunction, you'll have to go through linguistic contortions to explain why the conjoined clauses are not in parallel construction. >> They do not have to be. Tell me then, Another Guest, what is the meaning of this sentence: "They like you more than me" is it They like you more than I do (i.e. More than I like you) or They like you more than they like me (i.e. more than me) ? You're trying to make comparitive-than a preposition. It is not. And for the instances where it cannot work as such. Grammar has to be consistent or it doesn't work.
Regardless of what you say, CID, most people do use it as preposition. You may not like, but you can hardly change their speaking habits.
<<Below are Old English examples showing that it is clearly employed as a conjunction, because it is followed by a new independent clause, even if it is only a single pronoun in the nominative case>>
There are several problems with that. The most glaring is that I am asking for evidence that it is not a preposition, not evidence that it is a conjunction. That the two are mutually exclusive is a position held by you, but not by me. Second, it's not so much that “than” is conjunction, but that there's a language a lot like English in which a word a lot like “than” is being used in a manner that appears to be a conjunction. The fact that there is even such a thing as a noun in the nominative case (as opposed to a pronoun in the nominative case) shows that there are large grammatical differences. Third, you seem to be using “independent clause” versus “dependent clause” as the defining feature of conjunction versus preposition. Now, again, I am not a linguist, and I haven't been able to find a truly clear definition of “preposition” (Wikipedia defines a preposition as something that heads a prepositional phrase, and a prepositional phrase as something that is headed by a preposition), but my understanding is that the defining feature of conjunctions versus prepositions is that conjunctions join the same parts of speech, while prepositions join different parts of speech. <<um, no. But you cannot prove that it is rightly a preposition, and don't say because it is followed by the object case as a reason! >> No? Then on what is your argument based? I have yet to see any grounds presented. And the fact that it is followed by the object case is valid evidence; if everyone uses it as a preposition, then it is a preoposition. <<In "than me", me is not semantically oblique, though the form "me" is attempting to indicate it. It's not succeeding. >> How is it not oblique? <<He is than the house? I ran than that bookshelf? I put the book than the table? >> I don't understand what your point is. <<you are actually making two exceptions for the word "than" functioning as the same part of speech. When employed in the same function, it cannot be a preposition (first example), then a conjunction (second example). This is the flip-flop I am talking about. Does this make sense to you? >> No, not really. Your use of “exceptions” doesn't make sense, and you have three assumptions: that it is a conjunction in the second case, that it is being employed in the same function, and that it can't be different parts of speech in the two examples. On the first, you seem to be basing it on the nominative case, and, as I've said, that is not what I understand the definitive characteristic of conjunctions to be. On the second, you're sort of begging the question, and on the third, you haven't presented a clear rule on what you mean. <<Your sentence is analyzed this way,a nd doesn't really fit the situation: ... "that I like" is a dependent clause. It is not a sentence. >> Whether it is a dependent clause is completely irrelevant to the point in support of which it was presented: words within a clause can have cases different from the case of the clause as a whole. <<This construction was originally derived from this type of scenario: "He wrote the book, [and] that book I like" >> I find that difficult to believe. In Spanish, “He wrote the book that I like” = “Ếl escribṓ el libro que me gusta”. “He wrote the book, and that book I like” = “Ếl escribṓ el libro, y me gusta esto libro”. The “that” in those two sentences are completely different words: “que” vesus “esto”. We think of them as being the same word, but they are clearly different words, and that fact is reflected in other languages. It's even reflected in non-standard dialects of English in which people say things such as “He wrote the book what I like” (in Spanish, the first type of “that” is “que”, and “what” is either “que” or “quể”). Not that any of this is relevant. << <<If you want to pretend that "than" in a conjunction, you'll have to go through linguistic contortions to explain why the conjoined clauses are not in parallel construction. >> They do not have to be. >> It is a general rule, and you do need to explain why it doesn't hold in this case. <<Tell me then, Another Guest, what is the meaning of this sentence: "They like you more than me" >> Some people would say that when they intend the first meaning that you give. Logically, though, it means the second. What is your point? <<You're trying to make comparitive-than a preposition. It is not. And for the instances where it cannot work as such. Grammar has to be consistent or it doesn't work. >> I don't see that you have presented any reason why it is not. Grammar must be consistent in the sense that there be consistent rules, but that doesn't mean that words must have the same properties in all situations. In fact, if you insist on requiring “than” to be a single part of speech, it makes more sense to say that it is always a preposition. As I said, the case of a clause isn't necessarily the same as the words in the clause. So, take a look at the sentence “She like pizza more than the degree to which I like pizza”. The word “I” is in the subjective case, but the entire clause “ the degree to which I like pizza” is acting like a noun, and that entire noun is clearly the object of “than”. So if you look at something like “She likes pizza more than I”, and say that there's an elliptical “like pizza” at the end, then I can say that there's an elliptical “the degree to which” between “than” and “I”. “ the degree to which I like pizza” is a noun phrase which is the object of the preposition “than”. “than” connects the adjective “more” with this noun phrase, and that entire adjective-preposition-noun phrase forms an adverbial phrase that modifies “like”. So, from my perspective, there is an entirely consistent and reasonable interpretation of “than” as a preposition. You, on the other hand, have yet to do anything like that for your position. You haven't explained why it can't be a preposition, you haven't explained how it is a conjunction, and you haven't answered my questions as to what phrases it conjoins or why the phrase don't match up.
<<And the fact that it is followed by the object case is valid evidence; if everyone uses it as a preposition, then it is a preoposition. >>
This seems to be the only point for those proponents who say it's a preposition--"because it's followed by the object case, therefore it has to be a preposition", but does it? I agree that ;than' is a conjunction, but in 99% of time it is followed by the object case. I use it this way myself. But I also say "It's me" and "It's him" Whenever we change usage habits, that doesn't necessarily mean we have to re-categorize parts of speech to make them fit them. 'Than' is a conjuntion, but today's usage dictates that it *can* (and most like *will be*) followed by the object. Is this correct usage? No. Is it real usage. Yes. Does this make 'than' a preposition. NO. It is still a conjunction, but it's followed by the object in the same way we say "It's me" |