-1

In the movie The Big Short, there is a scene where two people. Bruce Miller and Mark Baum are doing a "debate" of sorts. The host introduces them as

... give a generous welcome to mr. Bruce Miller and Mark Baum.

In her choice of words, does she imply some sort of antagonism toward Baum by not introducing him as mr. as well, or perhaps greater goodwill toward Miller?

My main question is does the sentence "Mr. X and Y" puts them on equal footing, or should it be more appropriate to say "Mr. X and Mr. Y" or perhaps to use the plural form "Misters X and Y"?

2
  • 5
    Traditionally, Messrs (from the French messieurs) was used as the plural of Mister, but that sounds rather old-fashioned today. I would expect her to prefix both names with Mr - or neither. Commented Aug 3, 2022 at 19:56
  • Some people prefer not to use a title like Mr. Without knowing if Baum had made a request, or how Baum is usually introduced, we can't judge. It's also possible Baum was a PhD or an archbishop or something, in which case omitting a title would have a different connotation.
    – Stuart F
    Commented Mar 23, 2023 at 22:28

3 Answers 3

2

Generally mr x and y would be parsed as (mr x) and (y) not mr(x and y). This is a relatively weak signal though, so if someone had made such an introduction in real life, I would not think so much on it (but if you are in a situation where mr is appropriate, I would apply it to both).

However, in this specific example, I think the title is intended not to apply to Mark Baum. From the Ali vs Foreman comparisons, the dramatic pause from the speaker before introducing Baum, the film's whole theme of the arrogant establishment and the outsiders who knew better - while I wouldn't always assume such an omission would be deliberate in regular speech, it's almost certainly deliberate by the film makers. This scene is the bittersweet triumph of Baum vs the establishment, and setting Baum apart from the establishment in this way adds to that idea of Baum as outsider.

1

The title is Mr. doesn't have a widely accepted plural. The Merriam-Webster prefers to use Messrs, but as @kate-bunting observes it seems stilted, and would be unusual given the laid-back tone of the film.

Without an accepted plural form you can't conclude from word choice alone that there is an implied antagonism between the two characters.

One could use prosody, though. If there were a pause before the word “and”, for example: saying Mr. Bruce Miller ... and Mark Baum would suggest that Mark Baum didn't deserve the honorific.
If I say I'd like to introduce my landlady (beat) and a few of my friends then you might conclude that I don't count my landlady among my friends.

1
  • 1
    The last sentence could do with explaining the "comic beat", I think: "If there were... then ..."
    – Andrew Leach
    Commented Aug 10, 2022 at 13:57
0

I disagree with the other answers here. Titles and names can undergo coordination separately: ""Mr. and Mrs. Smith" means "Mr. Smith and Mrs. Smith." Likewise, it is perfectly natural to use "Mr. Bruce Miller and Mark Baum" to mean "Mr. Bruce Miller and Mr. Mark Baum." Merriam-Webster notes that this is perfectly possible with other titles, as in "Drs. Smith and Jones."

The only problem here is that "Mr." is not plural. As MW notes, the correct plural form (in speech, not writing) would be either "Misters" or "Messieurs." But both of those forms are sufficiently rare that you could certainly use "Mister" instead.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .