Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.

Find Lesson Plans on getty.edu! GettyGames

Will I be Arrested if I End a Sentence with a Preposition?

---------

From: Gary (gmosborne_at_TeacherArtExchange)
Date: Wed Jul 23 2003 - 10:47:23 PDT


A Southerner stopped a stranger on the Harvard campus and asked, "Could
you please tell me where the library is at?" The stranger responded,
"Educated people never end their sentences with a preposition." The
overly polite Southerner then apologetically repeated himself: "Could
you please tell me where the library is at, you jerk?"

While editing the proof of one of his books, Winston Churchill spotted a
sentence that had been clumsily rewritten by the editor to eliminate a
preposition at the end. The elder statesman mocked the intention with a
comment in the margin: "This is the sort of English up with which I will
not put."

These two anecdotes reflect an intolerance on both sides of the Atlantic
for the rule prohibiting sentence-final prepositions. So where did the
rule come from, anyway?

Before the science of language, linguistics, schools and universities
taught what is known as 'prescriptive grammar'. Prescriptive grammar is
not grammar (the rules of spoken language) at all but a list of "do's
and don'ts" prescribing the way those in or striving for the upper class
should talk. Because all upper-class private schools of the time
emphasized, if not required Latin, 'good' grammar was presumed to be
grammar that emulated Latin grammar.

The problem is, English is not Latin, an insight lost on
prescriptivists. Latin has cases and every Latin preposition is
associated with a case. For example, the word for "wine" in Latin is
vinum. However, the prepositional phrase corresponding to "in wine" is
in vino (as in 'in vino veritas'; 'wine brings out the truth') ending on
the Ablative case marker, -o, because in was associated with the
Ablative case. So the suffix of vin-o identifies the noun vin-um as the
object of the preposition in and not the object of any other preposition
in the sentence; in short, they go together.

Because sentences usually contain several prepositional phrases like
this (e.g., "A relative of the fruitfly was doing something like the
backstroke in the wine on the table in the library."), it is important
to keep up with which noun goes with which preposition. The easiest way
to do that is by a rule that prepositions are never separated from their
object noun (or noun phrase if the noun is modified by adjectives).
Latin has that rule.

Believing that Latin grammar represents grammatical perfection and
unintimidated by the onerous task of molding English in the image of
Latin, prescriptive grammarians proscribed the use of prepositions
anywhere other than immediately before their object noun. For example,
one should not say "the prescriptivist John clashed with," but rather
"the prescriptivist with whom John clashed", not "the rule John laughed
at," but "the rule at which John laughed".

The fact of the matter is, however, English simply does not have case
endings on nouns that are objects of prepositions, so the reason for
keeping prepositions and their object nouns together is wholly
irrelevant to English. You may keep them together or not. You'll never
spend a night in jail either way. However, because of the upper-class
bias in the rule's history, its use now makes you sound pretentious:
"the chap in whom I invested my trust". (Is that you? It isn't me; nor
was it Winston Churchill.)

This example teaches us two important lessons about language. First,
each and every language has its own set of grammatical rules and
everyone who speaks that language knows what they are in his or her
region. (They do vary slightly from region to region--big deal.) That is
what speech is: the use of grammatical rules to express oneself. Second,
prescriptive grammar is based on misconceptions about language and
causes far more mischief than good.

-----Original Message-----
From: Woody Duncan [mailto:wduncan@kc.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 9:25 AM
To: ArtsEdNet Talk
Subject: Re: Pet Peeve

Is this where we are at ?
Where are you at ?
What is wrong with the word at ?
Why should we not end a sentence with the word at ?
                                Woody in KC
Don't get upset, I'm just in a joking mood.

---