By Nominative, Accusative

Hello MaraI myself want to know why it is so. My guess is that this tendency has its origin in the grammar of Old English that was spoken by English people a millennium ago. The Old English was a language very similar to the present day German. One of its features was that nouns and adjectives...

Hello RoroFirst of all, please know that I am not a professional linguist. I learned the term "ergative verb" only a couple of years ago from a scholar on an English learners' forum for Japanese. So my knowledge is much more limited than yours. What I wrote in the previous message to the...

Welcome to the Forums, J-__-p, I'm not sure if I got what you meant. You wanna say that ".....Jim and me ..." is incorrect in that sentence because Jim has a subject form/nominative case(?) and me has an object form or accusative case, where both have to carry an accusative case? I'm so sorry...

Can someone just clarify what I believe to be true: 'Who' is the nominative form, while 'Whom' is the form in all other cases (accusative, dative, genitive (though 'whose' can also be used for genitive), etc.) - is this correct?

As to this problem, OED says merely that both "he" and "him" are possible and gives no judgement about which one is more grammatical. such a ~ as ~ The principle clause may be reduced to such and the words qualified by it for the purpose of producing a terse (exclamatory) form. The clause...

Kenny wrote: All subjects and subject complements are in the nominative case ... JTT: This is simply not true of the English that is used today. =============== CGEL: There are a number of constructions where both cases are found. In most, the nominative is restricted to formal (or very...

??I want that you clean up your room this instant! It would not surprise me to learn that it was possible in some NAmE Englishes. Some Romance language speaking immigrants may speak it. Quote from Everything2 : The Subjunctive Mood of English After verbs which formerly used the...

'Unaccusative verb' is new to me; but perhaps it means 'intransitive verb where the nominative is the semantic accusative'. So, we would say: 1. S + opens + O ('he opens the window'). But when we speak of the window on its own, we can say: 2. S + opens ('the window opens'). Someone of...

Whew! I can hear it that way if I try hard, but I like the surface subject of a passive sentence to be as much a nominative as the surface subject of an active one. Accusative: *Whom was invited? Dative: *Whom was given the book? And also: *To whom was given the book? But "To whom was...

Both are ok. But if you wanted to be really proper and old-fashioned you'd say: 1a) Whom are you waiting for? 2a) Whom are you looking at? To explain why this is the case might be abit more complicated, bear with me: As you already know, 'whom' marks for the dative case, which is often the...