A Noun or a Pronoun, But Not Both, Please!

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Since I broached the topic of pet peeves last week …

A cou­ple of days ago, I had a fairly appalling expe­ri­ence. A well-educated, artic­u­late mem­ber of my pro­fes­sion com­mit­ted a faux pas that qual­i­fies as my all-time, num­ber one, no wor­thy com­peti­tor pet peeve: I call it my “redun­dant pro­noun pet peeve.”

I have been hear­ing it with increas­ing fre­quency and from some very sur­pris­ing sources. Recently, I have also noticed the error more and more often in writ­ten doc­u­ments, espe­cially blogs.

Here’s an example:

“John, he went out to the park­ing lot to retrieve an item from his car.”

In that sen­tence, “he” is improper. “He” is a pro­noun that can be sub­sti­tuted for the noun, “John,” in that sentence.

It is a per­sonal pro­noun because it refers to a per­son, “John,” and indi­cates gen­der (male). More specif­i­cally, it is a sub­jec­tive per­sonal pro­noun that can serve as the sub­ject of the sen­tence. Other sub­jec­tive per­sonal pro­nouns are:

  • I
  • you
  • she
  • it
  • we
  • you
  • they

The sub­ject of the sen­tence above is “John” so the sen­tence should read: “John went out to the park­ing lot …”

When a sub­jec­tive per­sonal pro­noun is used, it takes the place of and stands instead of an alter­na­tive sub­ject. For vari­ety, assum­ing that the reader will under­stand that “John” is the sub­ject to which the sen­tence refers, the sen­tence could cor­rectly be struc­tured this way: “He went out to the park­ing lot …”

But includ­ing both “John” and “he” in that sen­tence results in the redun­dant use of the sub­jec­tive per­sonal pro­noun which is com­pletely super­flu­ous and gram­mat­i­cally incorrect.

I don’t know why this error seems to be rear­ing its ugly head more and more, espe­cially among folks who should know bet­ter. But every time I hear or read a redun­dant pro­noun, the result is the same as sit­ting at the din­ner table for Thanks­giv­ing with the sec­ond cousin twice removed who insists upon scrap­ing his fork across his front teeth with every third bite. It is jolt­ing to the ear or eyes.

Arti­cles on this topic fre­quently men­tion the “lose” vs. “loose” mis­take which I have also seen more and more often in recent months. But I have noted instances of redun­dant pro­nouns at least as frequently.

If your word pro­cess­ing soft­ware includes a gram­mar checker (as do Microsoft Word and Corel Word Per­fect), it will detect this error and sug­gest a cor­rect alter­na­tive wording.

Avoid­ing the “redun­dant pro­noun pet peeve” is one sim­ple, but effec­tive way to assure that your writ­ing and pub­lic speak­ing are impec­ca­ble and you gar­ner the respect of your read­ers or audience.


Tech­no­rati Tags:

On the Same Topic:

Sorry, but comments are no longer being accepted.

Previous post:

Next post:



Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.