Diccionario inglés-español con mil millones de traducciones disponibles
Linguee
ES
EN
The healthy reminder we all needed: While Radiohead’s recently material is fine, it’s just not as interesting as their music from this era. ‘I Promise’ is the least anticipated of the three new songs, and it more than delivers. The string synths and and Thom Yorke’s younger vocals give the world what it wanted: a nostalgic trip back to when so many people first got into the band. But what this song really does, is put faith in the 3 lost songs. Now, we are all more confident that ‘Lift’ will sound like the mid-90s Brit-pop gem it was destined to be.
Published
(ī)
Usage Note: Traditional grammar requires the nominative form of the pronoun following the verb be: It is I (not me), That must be they (not them), and so forth. Nearly everyone finds this rule difficult to follow. Even if everyone could follow it, in informal contexts the nominative pronoun often sounds pompous and even ridiculous, especially when the verb is contracted. Would anyone ever say It’s we? But constructions like It is me have been condemned in the classroom and in writing handbooks for so long that there seems little likelihood that they will ever be entirely acceptable in formal writing. · The traditional rule creates additional problems when the pronoun following be also functions as the object of a verb or preposition in a relative clause, as in It is not (them/they) that we have in mind, where the plural pronoun serves as both the predicate of is and the object of have. Adherence to this rule is waning. In our 1988 survey, 67 percent of the Usage Panel preferred the nominative they in the previous example. This percentage fell to 45 just five years later. In our 2009 survey, just 37 percent found they to be acceptable in this sentence. Meanwhile, the percent that accepted objective them rose steadily from 33 in 1988 to 39 1993 to 55 in 2009. Writers who dislike the construction can easily avoid it by saying They are not the ones we have in mind, We have someone else in mind, and so on. · When pronouns joined by a conjunction occur as the object of a preposition such as between, according to, or like, many people use the nominative form where the traditional grammatical rule would require the objective; they say between you and I rather than between you and me, and so forth. Some language commentators see this construction as a hypercorrection, in which speakers who have been taught to say It is I instead of It is me assume that correctness also requires between you and I in place of between you and me. This explanation of the tendency cannot be the whole story, since the phrase between you and I occurs in Shakespeare, roughly three centuries before the prescriptive rule condemning this practice was written. But the between you and I construction is nonetheless widely regarded as a mark of ignorance and is best avoided in formal contexts. · There is also a widespread tendency to use the objective form when a pronoun is used as a subject together with a noun in apposition, as in Us engineers were left without technical support. In formal speech or writing the nominative we would be preferable here. But when the pronoun itself appears in apposition to a subject noun phrase, the use of the nominative form may sound pedantic in a sentence such as The remaining members of the admissions committee, namely we, will have to meet next week. Writers who are uncomfortable about using the objective us here should rewrite the sentence to avoid the difficulty. See Usage Notes at but, we.
Traditional grammar requires the nominative form of the pronoun following the verb(not),(not), and so forth. Nearly everyone finds this rule difficult to follow. Even if everyone could follow it, in informal contexts the nominative pronoun often sounds pompous and even ridiculous, especially when the verb is contracted. Would anyone ever say? But constructions likehave been condemned in the classroom and in writing handbooks for so long that there seems little likelihood that they will ever be entirely acceptable in formal writing. · The traditional rule creates additional problems when the pronoun followingalso functions as the object of a verb or preposition in a relative clause, as inwhere the plural pronoun serves as both the predicate ofand the object ofAdherence to this rule is waning. In our 1988 survey, 67 percent of the Usage Panel preferred the nominativein the previous example. This percentage fell to 45 just five years later. In our 2009 survey, just 37 percent foundto be acceptable in this sentence. Meanwhile, the percent that accepted objectiverose steadily from 33 in 1988 to 39 1993 to 55 in 2009. Writers who dislike the construction can easily avoid it by sayingand so on. · When pronouns joined by a conjunction occur as the object of a preposition such asormany people use the nominative form where the traditional grammatical rule would require the objective; they sayrather thanand so forth. Some language commentators see this construction as a hypercorrection, in which speakers who have been taught to sayinstead ofassume that correctness also requiresin place ofThis explanation of the tendency cannot be the whole story, since the phraseoccurs in Shakespeare, roughly three centuries before the prescriptive rule condemning this practice was written. But theconstruction is nonetheless widely regarded as a mark of ignorance and is best avoided in formal contexts. · There is also a widespread tendency to use the objective form when a pronoun is used as a subject together with a noun in apposition, as inIn formal speech or writing the nominativewould be preferable here. But when the pronoun itself appears in apposition to a subject noun phrase, the use of the nominative form may sound pedantic in a sentence such asWriters who are uncomfortable about using the objectivehere should rewrite the sentence to avoid the difficulty. See Usage Notes at be
