The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

Non, nein, nyet, no, a thousand times, no! It is absolutely
impossible to say "apart from he" in standard English. Prepositions
invariably govern the last vestiges of grammatical case in our
language.


Yes, yes, yes, though little seen.

It looks awful. It looks 'orrid, but so long as you are directly
referring to the third person in the form of a subject, it has to be
'he'. (Or she.) 'It' can take care of itself, but 'they' qualifies too.)

For a simple starter: Who's there?"

Answer: "It is I.", but 'It is he." is also a possible answer.

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

The message
from Janet Baraclough contains these words:

No. The subject of the verb grown, was "anyone else" .


And the he/him, which apply to the same verb.

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

Non, nein, nyet, no, a thousand times, no! It is absolutely
impossible to say "apart from he" in standard English.
Prepositions
invariably govern the last vestiges of grammatical case in our
language.

Apart from he to whom lateral thinking is the norm.

Or, if you prefer the positive form, apart from he who thinks
laterally.

English has the delightful feature that mismatches are allowed,
and it is a matter of taste (and subtleties of meaning) how the
speaker chooses to resolve them.

I was careful to say "standard English"! Hell, we can use an adverb
as a verb if we want to: that's been outed for some years. "Dost thou
thou me, sirrah?" "'Are you copper-bottoming them, my man?' 'No, I'm
aluminiuming 'em, mum.'" We could both etcetera till the cows home
themselves.

--
Mike.

Rusty Hinge 2 wrote:
The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains
these
words:

Non, nein, nyet, no, a thousand times, no! It is absolutely
impossible to say "apart from he" in standard English.
Prepositions
invariably govern the last vestiges of grammatical case in our
language.


Yes, yes, yes, though little seen.

It looks awful. It looks 'orrid, but so long as you are directly
referring to the third person in the form of a subject, it has to
be
'he'. (Or she.) 'It' can take care of itself, but 'they' qualifies
too.)

For a simple starter: Who's there?"

Answer: "It is I.", but 'It is he." is also a possible answer.

Not the same thing at all, at all. Our discourse here touches not
complements of "to be", but the habits of prepositions. "Apart from
him, several of us have tried to grow ginger." The person referred to
as "him" there isn't actually the subject of "have tried", since
"apart from" specifically excludes him. Similarly, but more
obviously, in "Apart from him, has anybody grown ginger?" the "he"
person cannot possibly be the subject of "grown" because the question
is about everybody else.

--
Mike.

In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

English has the delightful feature that mismatches are allowed,
and it is a matter of taste (and subtleties of meaning) how the
speaker chooses to resolve them.

I was careful to say "standard English"! Hell, we can use an adverb
as a verb if we want to: that's been outed for some years. "Dost thou
thou me, sirrah?" "'Are you copper-bottoming them, my man?' 'No, I'm
aluminiuming 'em, mum.'" We could both etcetera till the cows home
themselves.

True, but I was referring to standard English, admittedly of a more
literary form than would be intelligible to the average Sun, Mail
or Telegraph reader :-)

When using a substantive clause like "she who must be obeyed", it
is not normal to change the "she" even when the clause appears in
an accusative position. And that is precisely what I was posting.
I could have said "Apart from him, to whom lateral thinking is the
norm.", but that is syntactically different and means something quite
different.

Yours in pedantry,
Nick Maclaren.

The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

I was careful to say "standard English"! Hell, we can use an adverb
as a verb if we want to: that's been outed for some years. "Dost thou
thou me, sirrah?" "'Are you copper-bottoming them, my man?' 'No, I'm
aluminiuming 'em, mum.'" We could both etcetera till the cows home
themselves.


And then there was Prof. Stanley Unwin...

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

Not the same thing at all, at all. Our discourse here touches not
complements of "to be", but the habits of prepositions. "Apart from
him, several of us have tried to grow ginger." The person referred to
as "him" there isn't actually the subject of "have tried", since
"apart from" specifically excludes him. Similarly, but more
obviously, in "Apart from him, has anybody grown ginger?" the "he"
person cannot possibly be the subject of "grown" because the question
is about everybody else.


Everybody else *AND* he.

Which other verb are you conjuring?

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

Rusty Hinge 2 wrote:
The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains
these
words:

Not the same thing at all, at all. Our discourse here touches not
complements of "to be", but the habits of prepositions. "Apart
from
him, several of us have tried to grow ginger." The person referred
to
as "him" there isn't actually the subject of "have tried", since
"apart from" specifically excludes him. Similarly, but more
obviously, in "Apart from him, has anybody grown ginger?" the "he"
person cannot possibly be the subject of "grown" because the
question
is about everybody else.


Everybody else *AND* he.

Which other verb are you conjuring?

No conjuring at all. "Apart from Johnny, everybody stand up, please."
"Apart from Johnny, has anybody else got a broken leg?" "Excluding
Johnny, who has grown ginger?" Ruled out of the structure, is
Johnnny, by the adbverbial phrase.

And, in ansering goosey-saucy-gander to commentilode coming
earlybird -- poor wormtongue, gulpydowndillyfrode, oh dear -- oh yes,
oyez oyez, we have fulsome Stanley AND shake our spears at Jackson
equipoisements IN our tooldle-oo shed when leaving the old besom of
the familode for a spot of peas and relaxy-quiet -- ah, that's
bettle! -- among the strings of unwins. Oh, yes.

--
Mike.

The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

Everybody else *AND* he.

Which other verb are you conjuring?

No conjuring at all. "Apart from Johnny, everybody stand up, please."
"Apart from Johnny, has anybody else got a broken leg?" "Excluding
Johnny, who has grown ginger?" Ruled out of the structure, is
Johnnny, by the adbverbial phrase.

No it isn't..

"Apart from Johnny" is part of "everyone", but is qualified as an
exception. Without the verb, "apart from Johnny" is meaningless.

And, in ansering goosey-saucy-gander to commentilode coming
earlybird -- poor wormtongue, gulpydowndillyfrode, oh dear -- oh yes,
oyez oyez, we have fulsome Stanley AND shake our spears at Jackson
equipoisements IN our tooldle-oo shed when leaving the old besom of
the familode for a spot of peas and relaxy-quiet -- ah, that's
bettle! -- among the strings of unwins. Oh, yes.


Rumbley-rumbly as Professor rotato in his gravy

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

The message
from Rusty Hinge 2 contains these words:

The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

Everybody else *AND* he.

Which other verb are you conjuring?

No conjuring at all. "Apart from Johnny, everybody stand up, please."
"Apart from Johnny, has anybody else got a broken leg?" "Excluding
Johnny, who has grown ginger?" Ruled out of the structure, is
Johnnny, by the adbverbial phrase.

No it isn't..

"Apart from Johnny" is part of "everyone", but is qualified as an
exception. Without the verb, "apart from Johnny" is meaningless.

Clauses often don't have a verb.

Johnny is not part of everyone. He's separate, in a clause of his own.

Try this one. "Apart from Rusty, Mike and Janet, everybody died of
boredom during the grammar discussion.

Rusty, Mike and Janet have no part at all in
the verb died. We are not part of the "everybody" who died. Our clause
separates us from their verb and fate.

"During the grammar discussion" is a qualifying clause without a verb,
but still makes perfect sense.
Janet

The message
from Janet Baraclough contains these words:
The message
from Rusty Hinge 2 contains these words:
The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these
words:

Everybody else *AND* he.

Which other verb are you conjuring?

No conjuring at all. "Apart from Johnny, everybody stand up, please."
"Apart from Johnny, has anybody else got a broken leg?" "Excluding
Johnny, who has grown ginger?" Ruled out of the structure, is
Johnnny, by the adbverbial phrase.

No it isn't..

"Apart from Johnny" is part of "everyone", but is qualified as an
exception. Without the verb, "apart from Johnny" is meaningless.

Clauses often don't have a verb.

Johnny is not part of everyone. He's separate, in a clause of his own.

Clauses rarely stand alone, and when they do, they are self-explanatory
and often, aphorisms.

Johnny's clause doesn't stand alone (even if Johnny does) - he refers to
'everyone else', or rather, 'everybody else' refers to the lack of
Johhny. (George Bush and The Pope will be pleased.)

Try this one. "Apart from Rusty, Mike and Janet, everybody died of
boredom during the grammar discussion.

Rusty, Mike and Janet have no part at all in
the verb died. We are not part of the "everybody" who died. Our clause
separates us from their verb and fate.

That's a perfectly reasonable construction, as we three (When shall we
three meet again?) can be either subject(s) or object(s).

"During the grammar discussion" is a qualifying clause without a verb,
but still makes perfect sense.

Not by itself, it doesn't.

Try saying those four words completely out of context, or in the middle
of (an otherwise) long silence...

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig

The message
from Rusty Hinge 2 contains these words:



"During the grammar discussion" is a qualifying clause without a verb,
but still makes perfect sense.

Not by itself, it doesn't.

Try saying those four words completely out of context, or in the middle
of (an otherwise) long silence...

Something tells me you are a bachelor. Otherwise, you would be highly
skilled at readily making sense of four words out of context, no verb,
in the middle of a long silence.

:-)

Janet.

The message
from Janet Baraclough contains these words:

The message
from Rusty Hinge 2 contains these words:



"During the grammar discussion" is a qualifying clause without a verb,
but still makes perfect sense.

Not by itself, it doesn't.

Try saying those four words completely out of context, or in the middle
of (an otherwise) long silence...

Something tells me you are a bachelor. Otherwise, you would be highly
skilled at readily making sense of four words out of context, no verb,
in the middle of a long silence.

:-)


There! And I thought that one rule of Holy Deadlock related to picking
important® words from the torrent as it races by...

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig