Nihil? Is that you?

A reader writes:

I’m appalled reading one of your blogs, “Back up your Birth Control …”, the comments on which go like this … oops … as this … ok, they go as this, “Says … ” … Here’s what you say, “Says whom?”. This is grammatically incorrect. “Says” is the verb; and there has to be a subject. The subject has to be in the nominative case. Therefore, since the subject in this case (this case, not the nominative case, but the real case here under discussion, which is the nominative case) is someone saying “Says”, then, therefore, and since “whom” in your sentence is not at all any kind whatsoever of an object and does not take the action, but actually delivers the action… thus, “whom”, the “m” of which denotes objective case, therefore, q.e.d., by rules of English grammar (not that the English have it so much together, but it’s also by the rules of German grammar, and even possibly German Catholic grammar … one would have to do a thorough study on whether it was the Protestant or the Catholic tribes of Germany who dominated or controlled or managed the investiture of the “m” in “whom” … in the translational manner of speaking (not to mention James Joyce, of late Irish memory … there being yet some memory left … not to say that the memory is leftist, no, not this …), well let’s assume for the matter of clarity that it was a board of grammar equally Protestant and Catholic, of equal women and men, and equally of those from the lower classes as from the upper, and, yes, with equal numbers of homosexual clerical grammarians in that board … well, I don’t know if I like this at all here … Who put the “m” into the language anyway? But the logically obvious proof here is that you should have written … ok, typed “who” without the “m”. Says who?

ps: Is my point clear, now? (I use “point” in the figurative sense.)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X