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

If I were to write a book about myself, Me would be a more natural-sounding title than I. Also, we say the us-vs.-them mentality instead of the we-vs.-they mentality.

share|improve this question
I'd call this the objective case since English doesn't really have an accusative. – Mark Beadles May 8 '12 at 2:07
I believe that the Lord of the Apes wrote an autobiography: Me, Tarzan... – MT_Head May 8 '12 at 2:12
Objective pronouns are the unmarked (i.e. "default") form in English. See e.g. here, here, and here. Now, what do you mean by "why"? Let me ask you right back: why not? Objective case is the default in many languages. There's no reason for it not to be. Are you asking about how this developed historically in English? Please clarify. – RegDwigнt May 8 '12 at 9:13
Whoops, I didn't know it was wrong to say "accusative"; I was just referring to the pronouns me, them, us, him, etc. @RegDwightΒВBẞ8 I guess I didn't know that the objective case was the default. It just seems strange then that people always talk about the subject and the object, the nominative case and then the accusative case, to where it seems like the "main" one is the first. Also, when you say "objective" it makes it sound like it ought to be the object of a verb, whereas the "subject" form of a pronoun seems like it ought to be able to serve just that purpose, e.g. in a title. – JohnJamesSmith May 8 '12 at 23:26
@JohnJamesSmith Many linguists use the term accusative in descriptions of English. For example, it's used in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. If you continue to say accusative rather than objective, I think no harm will come of it. – snailplane Oct 7 '13 at 17:35

There are a couple of ways to see this:

(a) the notion of "I" being 'nominative', "me" being 'accusative' etc is really something of a bastardisation, or at best a huge oversimplification; do you actually have any motivation for this analysis, or did you just 'hear it somewhere'?

(b) even if you were to conclude that "me" is always an 'accusative' form, who says that the accusative can't be used for "titles"/"topics"?

Or put another way: the fact of the matter is that English uses the form "me" both for the pronoun when used in 'isolation' and when it is the complement of a verb/preposition (as well as other uses). So:

Either (a) you analyse it as being accusative, and incorporate in your definition of 'accusative' this particular use.

Or (b) you analyse it as not being accusative, possibly taking this use as part of your reasoning for not doing so.

Something for you to think about: given that English nouns and adjectives don't decline (as they do in other prototypical languages with case systems), what does it really buy you to talk about 'nominative', 'accusative' etc in English?

share|improve this answer
Terminology like "nominative" and "accusative" lets us generalize about different forms of the personal pronouns. It's simpler to say something like "Pronouns take the accusative form when they are the direct object of a transitive verb" than it is to say something like "For the direct object of a transitive verb, we use the pronouns me, us, her, him, them instead of I, we, she, he, they respectively." – sumelic Jun 19 at 22:05

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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