Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: This is he?

Yesterday I was trying to find a Mr. X on the phone, and the voice on the other
end replied "This is he!"
A quick investigation with people around me did not dissipate the doubts; most
of them said that "this is he" is correct, but others  were unable to tell.
After some thinking, I asked why then everybody says "it's me" 
and not "it's I", and this time nobody seemed to have a satisfying answer.
So what is the right form? And why  is it that people appear to be so
unaware of their own language? I mean, many of the people I asked are
Americans born in America, but they don't seem to know any better than
me (or than I?)
In italian, the difference between "sono io" and "sono me" is so striking
that even our politicians know which one is right.
I am waiting to be illuminated!
+--
I know you can't speak, I know you can't sign
So cry right here on the dotted line

 I am waiting to be illuminated!
I'm happy to announce that the power crisis is over in California. You are now
encouraged to consume.
Ciao,
Ron
USA

So what is the right form? 
This is he is correct.  The verb "to be" requires the nominative case.
It is I is also correct.  I have a joke about that but  have no time to write
it now....later
ciao
arianna

 object. In this case "this" is the subject and "him" is the object.
(Ho ricomposto il messaggio in base alle mie esigenze, e me ne scuso).
Questo "him", per quanto ne so, non è affatto un oggetto, ma un predicativo
del soggetto. Trovo riscontro di ciò (oltre che nella mia grammatica
italiana) in "Cassell English Usage"-a cura di Tom Storrie e James
Matson-che, parlando dei sostantivi, riferisce: "It is importan to
distinguish carefully between a predicative noun and an object. In the
sentences above" (sono quattro esempi; ne cito solo due per brevità: "I am a
salesman. She was a writer") "each of the predicative nouns stands for the
same person(s) as does the subject. A noun-object denotes a person or thing
differerent from that denoted by the subject". Il discorso è, mutatis
mutandis, perfettamente riproducibile per i pronomi. Infatti, subito dopo:
"Pronouns are used predicatively, as illustrated below: It is I" (di nuovo)
"[...] Who are they?".
[snip]
Non aggiungo altro perché ripeterei le stesse cose. In attesa di clamorose
docce fredde, saluto tutti cordialmente.
Arturo

it now....later
Dunque, questa e' la barzelletta.
St. Peter hears a knock on the Pearly Gates.  "Who's there?"  he asks.
"It is I" replies the soul on the other side.
"Go to hell" says Saint Peter "We already have too many English teachers in
here!"
That's the best I can do at 12:37 on a Sunday morning.
ciao
Arianna

 "[...] Who are they?".
In fact "who are they" is correct to my ears while "who are them" would
definitely sound wrong. I acknowledge that the verb "to be" must be a special
case, I just had not thought about it thoroughly. Still, I would encourage
learners of English to remember the basic rule for choosing the appropriate
pronoun--consider the subject versus object status--when using all other verbs.
Ciao,
Ron
USA

 status--when using all other verbs.
How does the following sentence sound to you, Ron?
 Sometimes I think you and me are the only sane ones in this house 
 
I just picked it at random from the many one finds searching on the Web.
Do you think that 'me' is wrong here? If not, how would you account for
object case being used in subject position?
BTW, this has nothing to do with English, but since you're studying
Italian, I can't help asking you: if you had to tanslate the above into
Italian, which of the following ones would you pick out:
 A volte credo che io e te siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa
 A volte credo che io e tu siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa
Max

  A volte credo che io e tu siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa
For the same reason, I would choose "io e tu."
Ciao,
Ron
USA

 
I am not Ron, but I'll answer anyway.  You and me is incorrect.  
There are two sentences there.  The first senntence is "I think".  The second
sentence is "You and *me* are the are the only sane ones in this house.  You
and me are the subjects of the second sentence.  
Sometimes I think you and I are .....
It's analogous to: I think him is a student vs I think he is a student.
ciao
Ari

 Because "it's me" is correct and "it's I" is incorrect.
Since this false statement I've consulted a professional editor friend and she's
showed me a few written explanations on the subject of complements. The sources
seem to agree that in this case the pronoun is a compliment rather than an
object to the verb "to be" since that verb has a special quality. They also seem
to agree that the accepted colloquial usage is "it's me." So, I would conclude
that it is grammatically correct to say "it's I." However, my choice would be to
use the normally accepted usage "it's me" except in cases of formal writing or
when you're hanging around people who prefer following strict rules of grammar
as opposed to accepted colloquial usage. In the case of a person responding on
the telephone with "this is he," the speaker is already referring to himself in
the third person, so how much more formal can you get than that? He might just
as well say next, "Thank you for calling him."
Ciao,
Ron
USA

  A volte credo che io e tu siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa
.. noi siamo ... :-))) 
Cheers,
Loki
-- 
  Brevity is the soul of wit.    W.Shakespeare

 she's showed me a few written explanations on the subject of complements.
Scusate. Ho scritto troppo in fretta. Dovrei scritto "she's shown" o "she
showed." Dovrei fare bene attenzione con questo gruppo di persone furbe.
Ciao,
Ron
USA

 For the same reason, I would choose "io e tu."
Ahiahiahiahiahi...
'A volte credo che io e te siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa'
is the correct one.
Strangely enough, even if
'A volte credo che io e tu siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa'
the following sentence is right (isn't it?)
'A volte credo che tu ed io siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa'
saluti,
Peltio
che non conosce nemmeno la propria, di lingua.


I don't want to know what  it was that prevented you from writing down that 
4 lines joke the first time...



Uhm...ottima osservazione; posso proporla su it.cultura.linguistica.italiano?
Sono curioso di sentire che dicono gli esperti!


 'A volte credo che tu ed io siamo gli unici sani di mente in questa casa'
Non capisco un tubo, che cosa intendi dire? Ho scritto che penso che "io e tu"
sia la frase corretta in italiano. Non ho provato a traddure la frase sbagliata
"you and me are" ma invece la frase corretta "you and I are." Intendi dire che
"io e te" č la frase corretta in italiano o soltanto che č la traduzione
corretta di "you and me?" Mi sembra che tu abbia scritto che "io e te" č giusto
ma anche che "tu ed io" č giusto (non solo per trasporre il "tu" e il "io").
Allora, sono cosě perplesso!
Ciao,
Ron
USA

 Sono curioso di sentire che dicono gli esperti!
So which is the right form? And why  is it that people appear to be so unaware
of their own language? I mean, many of the people responding are Italians born
in Italy, but they don't seem to know any better than I. ;-)
Ciao,
Ron
USA

 to agree that the accepted colloquial usage is "it's me."
D'accordissimo anch'io.
Grazie per l'attenta precisione.
Saluti
Arturo

 seem, become, ecc.
Si, il verbo "to be" non è solo in questo caso. Per esempio, "Words into Type,"
di Prentice Hall, dice:
----------------
_complement_
A substantive or an adjective that completes a predicate. A complement usually
completes a verb of incomplete predication, such as "to be," "become," "to
appear," "to look," "to seem," though it may complete a direct object or the
object of an infinitive. Substantive complements of the first type in the
nominative case; those of the last two, in the objective case. All types of
complement are illustrated in the following sentences:
"He is a danger." ("Danger" is a subjective complement--also called a predicate
nominative--and is in the nominative case.)
"I call him a danger." ("Danger" is an objective complement, in apposition with
him, which it completes, and is in the objective case.)
"He is likely to be a danger." ("Danger" is an objective complement, completing
the infinitive "to be." It is in the objective case.)
"He is dangerous." ("Dangerous" is an attributive complement--also called a
predicate adjective-modifying the subject "he.")
"I call him dangerous." ("Dangerous" is a predicate adjective, modifying the
object "him.")
"He is likely to become dangerous." ("Dangerous" is a predicate adjective,
completing the adverbial infinitive phrase to "become dangerous.")
---------------
Inoltre, "Handbook of Good English," di Edward D. Johnson dice:
---------------
_It's me or it's I? Pronouns as subjective compliments_
A subjective complement is something that follows a linking verb such as "is;"
it's the "that" in "This is that"," and it's the "gray" in "All cats look gray."
A complement isn't the object of a verb but something linked to the subject by a
verb. The rule for complements is very simple: They should be in the same case
as the subject they are linked to, which is, of course, the subjective case.
So, should it be "It's me" or "It's I?" "That's him" or "That's he?" How about
"I looked for bottlenecks at the plant and discovered that the worst one was
I"--does that sound like standard English?
We should feel free to break the rule when the subjective pronoun seems stiff or
unnatural. Nevertheless, sometimes it's better to follow the rule and use the
subjective in formal writing, and even when trying to speak with special
dignity: "It is I, your employer, whom you are cheating by your tardiness."
---------------
Basta, ehh?
Ciao,
Ron
USA


Lupo, I was running late.  I think I had to be somewhere by a certain time, but
I don't remember where.  I am a slow typist, you know....
ciao
Ari



OK OK... I detect some sarcasm here... I am sorry if my original 
post sounded somewhat snobbish, that was not my intention.
I was just surprised because there seem to be no agreement on a thing so common
as answering the phone. I am sure that Peltio has no doubts on which form is to be
used in his example; I think it very hard for an Italian to do such mistakes, Peltio
was just pointing out a curiosity.
"Io e te" is the right form in italian, nobody would ever say "io e tu", it is so
wrong that it hurts; no doubts there. Peltio's question was why you can't 
swap the two pronouns: "io e te" is OK  but not "te e io" (it is not horrid as 'io e tu' but 
it must be changed into "tu ed io"). True, I have no idea why is that, but I know
which one is right form the guts (probably because it was hammered into me 
at grammar school).
I do not rate Italian below or above any other language; I am sure there are many 
quirks in Italian too, but let me say that English has a very wide twilight zone when it 
comes about rules and exceptions.


 twilight zone when it comes about rules and exceptions.
I'll give you no argument about quirks in English. Even the experts have topics
on which they don't agree. We practitioners just do the best we can. But I will
add that Italian grammar seems to me to be very complicated.
Ciao,
Ron
USA


I can imagine how difficult it may be for you;  it scares me green too.
I self learned my english by reading tons of books, and no one of them
was a grammar, so may be you can do without it too.
Speaking of languages, one thing that always fascinated me is that no
matter of how many of them there may be around, apparently no one 
can fully express people's feelings and emotions; this is so true that
normally it takes extraordinary ability like poetry or other forms of art to 
convey them effectively. Isn't that weird?


On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:19:52 GMT, 
yeah....@earthlink.net
 (Lupo Buono) wrote:
Oh, by the way, someone observed on the italian ng that the form
"io e tu" should be considered formally correct, even if it is not used
('io e te' is used instead). So there is the same problem with pronouns
in italian as well as in english...I'll be butched!


 
But you would choose the wrong one. Even though some would probably
recommend using "tu ed io" (which I too find preferable), the former is
perfectly standard Italian (despite of 'te' being the objective case),
while the latter is not. It might not look very logical, but it's a fact
of life.
BTW, you remember that issue about "than I" vs "than me", don't you?
I've just found one more paragraph in my grammar(*) accounting for the
latter being widely used even if some prescriptive grammars uphold the
former:
  The reason of this vacillation is that 'than' and 'as' can be analysed
  either as prepositions, which require the objective case forms, or as
  conjuctions with ellipted predicates, which require the subjective case
  form [...]
 
Max
(*) A grammar of contemporary English (Quirk,Greenbaun,Leech - Longman)

On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Ron wrote:

Uhm... according to the Merriam-Webster's, "showed" is a valid alternate
form for the past participle of 'show'.
Max

 Allora, sono cosě perplesso!
So am I. But 'io e tu' sounded so wrong, yet it seems I have to stand
corrected.
I am moving to it.cultura.linguistica.italiano to learn from the people who
really know.
: )
saluti,
Peltio

 form for the past participle of 'show'.
That does it!!!
I'm switching to French!
Peltio

This, of course, makes no sense to me.
And in fact it doesn't: it's simply a mistake. "Io e te" is used
colloquially, but it's not "proper" Italian.
"Io e tu" is, from a theoretical point of view, formally correct, but
no one uses it, for the same reason no one says "I and you" in
English: politeness requires to use the pronoun referring to the other
person first.
In the end, the only form 100% correct is "tu ed io" [watch out for
possible misunderstandings relative to "tu e Dio" :o))) ].
--
Ciao
Frank

 convey them effectively. Isn't that weird?
Secondo me, le parole sono soltante la forma della communicatione la più
riconosciuta. Il puro significato viene dal contesto che include tutte le cose
materiale e immaginate, insinuate e ricordate, rozzo e sottile.
Ciao,
Ron
USA


Grazie per la precisazione sull'uso di phun; permettimi di correggere alcune
imprecisioni nel tuo messaggio:
un parola --> una parola. A good rule of thumb to match the articles with the gender
of the nouns is that almost any noun ending with -a is feminine (so the articles will be
la/una) and all nouns ending with -o are masculine (so the articles will be lo/un/uno).
This rule is not always true, but you'll have better chances to make the right choice.
particulare --> particolare
per fare una bella mistura delle connotazione: io direi 'per creare una interessante
e curiosa associazione di parole'
In l'altro caso --> Nell'altro caso
un parola che si rende a conto d'avere due significati --> una parola che ha piu' di un significato
Il tuo italiano e' piu' che decente; spiegare in italiano la differenza tra fun e pun come hai
fatto tu richiede una conoscenza della lingua decisamente avanzata.
By the way, my enquiry on it.cultura.linguistica.italiano on "io e tu" has spawned some 
harsh debate already; just like in english!


as answering the phone. 
The problem is, the thread at that point had nothing to do with
phone-answering-formulas anymore. So, once and for all, can anybody
give a definite, reliable reply on whether "this is he", "this is she"
are acceptable ways to identify oneself over the phone in English,
without making a fool of oneself? Thank you, darlings.
-- 
Isa
Work like you don't need money,
Love like you've never been hurt,
And dance like no one's watching
http://web.tiscalinet.it/alfabeto_auschwitz/

 Basta, ehh?
Ad abundantiam (però devi capire che io non la tua stessa facilità di
accesso a fonti come quelle che citi).
Thanks
Arturo

 without making a fool of oneself? Thank you, darlings.
It was I who said that "This is he" was incorrect, and I later characterized my
comment as inaccurate. In fact, it is grammatically correct to say "This is he,"
or "This is she." The reason for this is that the pronoun is characterized as a
verb compliment to "is" rather than an object. This is a special case for a
few verbs as you'll find in another of my posts. The "This as he" response,
however, sounds very formal not only because of the "verb compliment" issue, but
also because the speaker is referring to him- or herself in the third person. If
you prefer the royal treatment, you might say, "This is we," but you may hear a
giggle at the other end of the line. Or, similarly to as I suggested to Lupo,
you might choose instead to say "This is Isa."
Don't be concerned, however, about saying "This is she." Some people may think
that you are confusing an object pronoun with a subject pronoun in a misguided
attempt to sound "posh" (as I had thought, misguided myself), but you can rest
assured that you are speaking in perfectly correct English. The excess formality
is excusable, in my opinion, given the fact that you never know who may be on
the other end of the telephone line. So, you should have no reservations about
saying "This is she," especially in a business environment. To avoid the issue
entirely, I tend to say "Speaking," or "This is Peter," or "This is Paul," or
whichever disciple I'm impersonating that day.
Ciao,
Ron
USA

all talking about the same thing? 
I said it was correct last year and I am still of the same opinion now.  In
fact, it's not an opinion but a grammar rule.  The verb "to be" takes the
nominative case, therefore,.  this is her and this is him are definetely
incorrect.  "Speaking" is correct and so is "This is ..name...". 
bye
Arianna

 I am waiting to be illuminated!


To avoid the issue entirely, I tend to say "Speaking," or ....
Wow, wow, hold the phone, man! Are you saying that you can answer
the phone by just saying "Speaking" ? I never heard that, but it sounds
like the good old 'Pronto' we say in Italy! I normally say "Marco speaking"
or "This is Marco", but I could switch to 'speaking' in no time if you tell me
that is a valid answer!



LOL
Now that is the ultimate response. I got the same idea after reading so many different 
replies. I'll second that: let's get rid of the grammar!!!


 him are definetely incorrect.
If this is of interest to anyone, here is what one of the most
authoritative reference grammars says with regard to the above issue:
  --
  FUNCTION            SUBJECTIVE CASE   OBJECTIVE CASE
  subject             He was late
  subject complement  It was he         It was him
  object                                I saw him at the station
  prepositional                         We cannot manage without
        complement                      him
 
  As the table above shows, both subjective and objective case forms can
  be used for subject complement. Although the prescriptive grammar
  tradition stipulates the subjective case form, the objective case is
  normally felt to be the natural one, particularly in informal style.
  --
Max

that is a valid answer!
yes, and very common too.
bye
ari

the phone by just saying "Speaking" ? I never heard that
Wait a minute!  You can say "speaking" only if the person at the other end is
asking for you by name.  In other words, "speaking" is not analogous to
"pronto".  
"Hello, is Joe there?"
"Speaking!" ( = this is he)
BTW, I always thought that answering the phone with "pronto" was sort of weird.
 Pronto for what?  It's like picking up the phone and saying "On your mark, get
set, GO!".  I think I am going to try that next time my phone rings.
ciao
Arianna

 that is a valid answer!
That's not what I intended to say. I meant that "Speaking," just like "This is
he," is a valid response to a query such as "Is this Marco?" You are doing a
fine job of answering the phone and need no correction. I would not answer a
phone by saying "Speaking" but it wouldn't seem terribly odd and I may have
heard someone do it once or twice. Depending on your mood there are many ways
you can answer a phone.
"Hello?"
"May I ask who's calling?"
"Yes?"
 "Whatta ya want?"
"This better be good"
You'll get a different response not only based on your choice of words but also
your tone of voice.
Ciao,
Ron
USA


Hmmmm....really? What's your  wattage?  You know how high those PG&E bills can
get.  How about "enlightened"?  I think that uses up less electricity :-))
bye
arianna



I thought 'illuminate' to be an applicable term, 



I am sure it is.  I was just kiddidng.  "illuminate" brings up the vision of a
chandelier, but I am sure you can also use figuratively.
ciao
arianna

...

My thoughts exactly! Is all that pain we suffered in learning the
irregular English verbs to have been in vain?
--
Xakero

 irregular English verbs to have been in vain?
According to Barron's 501 Italian Verbs, debba is a valid alternate form for the
present subjunctive of "dovere" with "deva" listed as the primary choice.
Ciao,
Ron
USA

il 21 Aug 2001 21:13:01 GMT, 
gfca...@aol.com
 (GFCARRERA) ha
scritto:

Could you have "This is her" - as you point to the individual
arriving that you have just been mentioning to another?this seems to
me to be the time when one would use this construction. 
How about  the phrase  "I am her." 
But what do I know, I only speak it... (should be an acronym
BWDIKIOSI, perhaps shortened to BWDIK... :-))))
Cheers,
Loki
-- 
  Brevity is the soul of wit.    W.Shakespeare

 Isa
Don't try it in New Zealand, people will think you're definitely
weird. :-)))
In response to a direct name enquiry on the phone, most will just
reply, "Speaking", or "This is <name> speaking."


 that is a valid answer!
I usually answer "speaking" after someone has asked for me
specifically, otherwise it's a "hello", croaked out in the mornings
and more sprightly after my espresso. :-)))
Cheers,
Loki

 >From: 
yeah....@earthlink.net
  (Lupo Buono)

But he's Italian - shouldn't he be illuminated in paint and a large
capital letter? :-)



Hi Loki!
He's Italian?  You are kidding...I didn't know that.  He lives a few miles from
me and his English is so good.  Well, if he's Italian then I would say
"illuminated" is definetely the right term.
bye
arianna

"illuminated" is definetely the right term.
I probably never introduced myself properly, but I am 101% Italian, born
and lived in Genova for 34 years. 3 years ago I was sent by my company
to Houston as a temporary transferee, then I accepted a job there, and I moved
to the Bay Area after discovering that GFCARRERA lives nearby :)
I am completely flattered by "his English is so good" (I did not bribe her!). 
Thanks!  I'm sure I can keep improving it with the help of you guys. My real name
is Marco, and I do not use my real email and full identity on usenet only  to avoid 
spammers. 
So, are you Italian too?  You can write very good Italian so you probably are;
am I right?


set, GO!".  I think I am going to try that next time my phone rings.
"Pronto"  is weird indeed, I never knew where it comes from. It is completely
meaningless.


 and more sprightly after my espresso. :-)))
Spritely - I think I need two coffees...


 >From: "Loki"

Well, his name is, so I took a guess... wrong again is it?  :-))



Nata a Milano alla clinica Mangiagalli in via Commenda :-)).  My real name is
Gwedalina.  I think everyone knows that by now.
bye
arianna 
I am flattered to read that you moved to the Bay area because of me!

capital letter? :-)
Hey Loki, I did not get that... :(  
care to explain?


 care to explain?
Just to confirm that the reference is to something of general knowledge, I'll
reply. It's a reference to illuminated manuscripts. When medieval scribes would
make copies of sacred texts they would begin sections with an exaggeratedly
large first letter of the first word. Accompanying drawings would illuminate the
text. Of course, this practice wasn't limited to Italian scribes, and I believe
the medium was ink, but let's give Loki a little slack.
Ciao,
Ron
USA



Yes, lets :-)))  
Can I be pedantic (pretty please) and say the ink was sometimes
painted on? And
tempera was also used. I didn't assume all illuminated scribes were
italian, there is the Book of Kells after all, but more as a
reference to an italian's sense of art and history (generalisation I
know, meant as a compliment)
Cheers,


 care to explain?
"Illuminated manuscripts" as written and painted by monks centuries
ago.
Pehaps 'decorare' in italiano as the 'incipit' usually is.
Cheers,
Loki

Ok, now I know what you meant! 


meaningless.
Well, not really. I guess the idea behind it is you're "ready" to both
listen and speak?
-- 
Isa
Work like you don't need money,
Love like you've never been hurt,
And dance like no one's watching
http://web.tiscalinet.it/alfabeto_auschwitz/

-- 
Yes, of course, because those are the only two actions that are involved in
answering a call (besides thinking!), but is it necessary to say that?  That's
exactly what makes it so strange.  I really never understood why one would need
to say "pronto".  Do you know of any other language where the phone is answered
in such a manner?  Everytime I say "pronto" (obviously not too often) I feel I
am saying "On your mark, get set, go!"
ciao
Arianna

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:20010822125201...@mb-mf.aol.com...


 Arianna
So what would you say then? "sono io", "dimmi"  Breathe heavily until
the caller speaks :-)))
At least pronto is clear which is probably why it was used in the
days when phones were less clear. My sister used to say pronto for
when dinner was ready too.
But why on earth did people on radio communications say "Roger"?, not
to mention "over and out". they're all strange when you think about
it. 
Loki
Over 


answering a call (besides thinking!), but is it necessary to say that? ....
OK, I turned the question on icli, and according to Roscio 'pronto'
comes from the early days of telephone communications. Apparently,
early telephones required a bit of manipulation before one could
talk, so people said 'pronto' after taking whatever actions were required.
I believe that to be a good explanation, and I would also think it very likely that
the person answering the phone needed a few seconds to accept  the 
idea that it was OK to talk  to a box, so when they were finally 'ready' to speak, they 
merely announced that (with an unspoken '...and God help me' to follow) 
I can imagine this new alien machine starting to ring inside a house, instantly killing the
ongoing conversations. Glances are exchanged in a chilly silence: will you take that?
who, me? I did it last time, now you take it! Coins are flipped, and finally a very depressed 
guy walks up to the wall, unhooks the thing, takes a deep breath, may be he even tries to
quickly comb his hair, and utters a sheepish 'Pronto', while people standing around are 
suffocating with laughter.


it. 
I believe you say 'over' to notify the other side that you are finished speaking
for the moment and you expect them to reply ('over to you'), while 'over and out' 
indicates your intention to terminate the communication ('over to you, and I am out of here').


 According to Barron's 501 Italian Verbs
Uff. E io che mi sono appena comprato "2001 Italian and English Idioms"
per starti dietro con le frasi idiomatiche...
Ciao,
Dario.
ITA