English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Okay, I'm probably being a bit slow here, but I don't quite understand this story:

Supposedly an editor had clumsily rearranged one of Churchill’s sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his style, scribbled this note in reply: “This is the sort of English up with which I will not put.”

I mean, it made me laugh, but that was mostly because of how stupid it sounded, not because I actually understand what's going on here. Anyone care to explain it? In particular, which are the prepositions?

share|improve this question
That never happened. That's a misattribution no longer to be put up with. – RegDwigнt Aug 21 '12 at 13:50
up vote 4 down vote accepted
  • This is the sort of English I will not put up with.

"With" is a preposition (and it's "wrong" to end a sentence with one.)

  • This is the sort of English with which I will not put up.

"Up" is still a preposition, so we gotta change it again.

  • This is the sort of English up with which I will not put.

And there we have Churchill's response.

(PS. I am ignoring whether it's actually his response, or his altered response, or what have you, and focusing on the initial question. :) )

share|improve this answer
I think "up" in this instance is not considered a preposition, since it is part of the verb phrase "put up", which has a meaning distinct from "put". – Kit Z. Fox May 18 '11 at 0:31
I'd agree, actually. But Churchill seemed to be taking this to the extreme. – emragins May 18 '11 at 0:51
@emragins: Yes, I deliberately refrained from mentioning that confusion in my question, as it was pretty clearly not relevant to the issue I was curious about. – SamB May 18 '11 at 3:10
Hmm, I guess a big part of why this sound so silly is the separation of the "put" and "up" in the term "put up". Actually, come to think of it, isn't "put up with" pretty much atomic here? It's kind of funny that I could even understand the sentence that way... – SamB May 18 '11 at 3:19
Yep... I think that's entirely the point and what makes it so funny. – emragins May 18 '11 at 4:09

It sounded stupid because the normal way of saying that is "this is the sort of English I won't put up with" which ends in a preposition.

He was making a point that sometimes it is better to end a sentence with a preposition rather than slavishly following alleged rules. (Alleged because it IS ok to end a sentence with a preposition.)

share|improve this answer
It's not a rule now and never was. – nohat May 17 '11 at 23:44

As I learned the quote, he didn't have a problem with the "English" involved, but with the prescriptivist busybody who had red-pencilled one of his speeches.

The quote, as I learned it, was "This is the sort of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put."

share|improve this answer
But, of course, like so many truly excellent quotes, this one's too good to be true: "A misattribution no longer to be put up with" – MT_Head May 17 '11 at 22:11

protected by RegDwigнt Jul 2 '14 at 17:56

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.