It’s not you, it’s me

It’s not you, it’s me

It is not I it is you

 

This is by way of being an apology.

Etiquette dictates that those intending to dump their girlfriends or boyfriends should seem to apologise by employing the simple formula, “It’s not you, it’s me.” Passing a few hours online the other day, I happened across a rather attractive T-shirt for sale which bore the message, “IT’S NOT ME, IT’S YOU”. That I must have, I thought. Someone has finally had the bright idea of telling the truth. How refreshing to get it on my chest! However, the T-shirt is neatly folded in the drawer beside my bed, as yet unworn.

Every morning when I wake up I can’t avoid seeing a huge Rob Ryan print on the bedroom wall. Two lovers are looking up at the heavens. They are separated by a hill, on which is written, “These same stars and this same sky hang over both you and I. In my dreams and in my heart they help us feel less far apart”. Every morning I quickly look away. Why? Let me explain.

We enjoy it when politicians reveal their ignorance of things they ought to know, but I find I can forgive most of them most of the time. I forgave the Schools Minister in 1998 who couldn’t multiply 7 by 8, and the Agriculture Minister in 2012 who didn’t know the price of a pint of milk, and Nicky Morgan in 2014, when she was Minister of Education and refused to answer any questions on her maths tables. In September I even forgave the US Presidential candidate who hadn’t heard of Aleppo. In May, however, when we discovered that Nick Gibb, the Schools Minister, couldn’t tell his prepositions from his subordinating conjunctions, I was in difficulties.

Emily Thornberry, our current Shadow Foreign Secretary, was recently unable to tell Sky News the names of any of the foreign ministers she was just about to meet. I forgave her. But one member of the public didn’t, tweeting “why dont her and jess Philips go form a feminist party and let some grown up talk.” When I read that tweet, I winced. It wasn’t the aggression or the logic. No, what I found really wincesome was the use of English.  It’s only a tweet, so the punctuation is forgivable, but “why dont her and jess Philips go form a feminist party” commits the offence for which Jeremy Corbyn was justly pilloried when he wrote in the Sunday Telegraph about “the price you and me are paying” for the NHS. Both Jeremy and the tweeter were confusing the accusative form with the nominative. Where on earth, I asked myself, did these people go to school?

Well ok, Thornberry went to a secondary modern, but Corbyn went to a grammar school! What an irony! Of course, all schools try to take grammar very seriously these days, but it isn’t easy. My son’s teacher recently wrote to parents about the importance of spelling and “regular practise of the key rules.” There followed a list of spellings “to practice at home.” Another teacher wrote to us that children must learn “how to use apostrophe’s in their sentences.”  On each occasion, I winced, just as I used to when shops first started putting up signs directing us to “Womens clothing”, “Mens gifts” and “Childrens books”.

But why all this wincing? Why do I avert my gaze from the Rob Ryan? Why, when I attended an English professor’s inaugural lecture last year, did I find myself physically unable to look any more at her PowerPoint slide once I had noticed the word she spelled ‘LIASON’?  And why haven’t I worn that T-shirt? Is it because, by using the accusative instead of the nominative, it too commits the mistake no properly educated person would commit.

Hamlet was a product of the University of Wittenberg. When he dumped Ophelia, Hamlet went to inordinate lengths to avoid saying “It’s not you, it’s me.” Of course, he lived to regret it. But even so, when he stepped forward at her funeral to reveal that he hadn’t died, he took care with his pronouns, crying “This is I, Hamlet the Dane,” not “Cooee! It’s me!”

Hamlet got his comeuppance. And I feel mine is awaiting me too. My compulsion, not just to wince at solecisms but to point them out to someone – even, sometimes and to my shame, to the perpetrator of the offence – is surely a symptom of a deep-seated sickness. My only excuse is that I was brain-washed at school into believing that there’s a right way and a wrong way of constructing a sentence and then spelling it. Of course I know now that this is nonsense. There are no rules, no laws of English, only habits and conventions. In the rational bit of my brain I fully understand that. And yet, when I see the word ‘LIASON’, my knees jerk, Pavlov’s dog salivates and I label as idiots and lesser beings those who have dared commit the offence of challenging the linguistic habits I was signed up to by my school teachers.

All this wincing is simply snobbery. It’s pathetic. It’s really sad. I need help. In the meantime I am writing to apologise to all those whose grammar I have condemned (Rob, Jeremy, the T-shirt-manufacturer, and the rest of you) and to beg forgiveness. And I say to you, without wincing, “It’s not you. It’s me.”

One comment on “It’s not you, it’s me
  1. Alan West says:

    Fascinating! It seems to me that it will always be a (quite pointless) struggle to retrofit rules that were devised to fit some situation in the past to accommodate usage in the present. Living languages evolve through usage, and if the rules only describe archaic usage, then they are obsolete and need to be updated! It’s what makes English in particular such a vibrant and adaptable language.

    That said, It drives me mad that Starbucks has messed up the communications skills of the entire generation of people under 35. When the young banker or fund manager in front of me in the queue says, “Can I get a skinny latte…” (note the absence of a question mark), I think to myself, “Of course you can get a skinny latte here, this is a bloody coffee shop after all. Why don’t you just ask if you can have, or even would like, a skinny latte, and how about adding a please at the end while you are at it!” At this point, I realise that I have lost both my place in the queue, and my right to claim that I am a linguistic liberal.

    In the instance of your t-shirt however, I think you could probably allow yourself to wear it under post-Shakespearean rules of grammar, because of the ambiguity of what ‘It’ refers to. If I am the ‘doer’ of whatever the unspecified thing is, the correct pronoun is ‘I’ and, if I am the receiver, it is ‘me’. So, I could be saying, “It’s not me (they are blaming), it’s you.” And if for example Bob Dylan pitched up at the Nobel Prize ceremony wearing the inversely worded t-shirt, it could be interpreted as, “It’s not you (they are giving the Literature Prize to), it’s me.”

    He won’t, of course. Pitch up, that is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please feel free to comment in any language, but note that comments will be published in English. We offer no warranty as to the accuracy of the Greyhares translation!