Thursday, March 13, 2008

On Ending Sentences with Prepositions:

I tend to agree with Gloria:
My understanding as to not ending a sentence with a preposition was that the rule originated in Latin - where the preposition must be followed by the object in order to be correct. I'm ambivalent about the rule. I think the rearrangement of words to avoid such is a neat trick that shows off one's verbal acrobatics, but also generally unnecessary to clarifying one's meaning.
Thanks, G.

6 comments:

stupid young lawyer said...

Agreed. I believe most literary 'scholars' have abandoned the rule. Check the Chicago Manual of Style. I'm almost positive it no longer requires strict adherence to the rule.

nicolle said...

i agree with that sentiment.

does that mean i am not addicted to trying not to end sentences with prepositions? no. that's just a hangup i'm stuck with. but...trying not to end a sentence with a preposition may obscure the sentence's meaning. i learned that lesson, strangely enough, from the federal agent character in beavis and butt-head do america.

Guy Fawkes said...

If you choose to do law review next year, you will become intimately familiar with the Texas Law Review Manual position on the issue. Enjoy.

Mike Hunt said...

Sharon, I like you, but you really need to spell the titles of your posts correctly. In particular, when you post about a grammar subject, the post will be less ironic if you simply proofread the title of your post so that there isn't a glaring spelling error.

In other words, there is no such word as "preposistions."

Anonymous said...

Glad to see Lat has fired yo' ass from ATL!

Sharon said...

Hardly. Good try though!