I usually play grammar by ear (I never before bothered to formally study the rules), so I don't understand why

"Thank you for inviting my family members and also I" and "Thank you for inviting me and my family" both sound correct while

"Thank you for inviting I and my family" and "Thank you for inviting my household and me" both sound incorrect.

You are watching: My family and me or my family and i

The I vs me dominance doesn't really help; "Thank you for inviting me" sounds correct "Thank you for inviting I" is obviously wrong.

Can anyone aid through this?


*

"Thank you for inviting my family and me"

Two points are going on right here.

1> Always put yourself behind the other person in a compound. So I, me, and so on. constantly comes behind the various other people - you, them, they, my friends, my household, ... the list is endmuch less -- in English, you don't count for as much as the world you're linking to with a conjunction.

The second difficulty is really easier. Just think what you would certainly say if tright here wasn't somepoint (someone) else connected to it. Would you ever before say, "Thank you for inviting I"? If not, then don't usage 'I' simply bereason they invited someone else also.


19
Reply
Share
ReportSave
level 2
· 9y

I've been making use of 'My frifinish and also I' for the longest time, mostly because I was told that if you take the other perchild out of the sentence it transforms the framework entirely because you lose a subject/noun and so on Can someone please clarify this?


1
Reply
Share
ReportSave
Continue this thread 


level 1
· 9y
What you really need to understand also is that "I" is for once you are doing the verb and also "me" is for once someone is doing the verb to you. Since the inviting is being done to you, it's gotta be "me."


6
Reply
Share
ReportSave
level 1
· 9y

Well. What's happening is that the verb calls for somepoint in the objective situation to come after it. ‘My family’ is the very same whether it's topic or object, and if you usage ‘my household and I’ as the object of a verb, bereason the family members bit comes initially it kind of ‘shields’ the I from sounding also stselection. (It is still wrong, in standard created English, but it's the sort of point you will certainly hear a lot in speech.) Whereas if ‘I’ comes automatically after the verb it's apparent directly ameans that it needs to be in the objective develop ‘me’.


7
Reply
Share
ReportSave
level 2
· 9y

This is what threw me off, thanks!


1
Reply
Share
ReportSave
level 1
· 9y

If you pare the sentence down to its essentials, the rules end up being clearer. As you detailed, "give thanks to you for inviting me" is correct bereason me is an object, not a subject. Hence, "thank you for inviting my family, friends, poodle, pet fish and also me" is also correct.


3
Reply
Share
ReportSave
level 1
· 9y · edited 9y

We are talking around the corresponding indirect instance forms of what is "my household and I" and "I and my family" in the (unstressed) straight case. "My family" doesn't readjust anymethod, however the instraight case develop of "I" is "me".

Now the question is what happens as soon as we put the two together and we really want the instraight case of the conjunction. Langueras differ in just how they manage this. English as well as the major European languperiods put both parts in the indirect case before joining them. So the correct creates are " my household and me" and also " me and my family". This is all tbelow is to say from an educated prescriptive suggest of see.

Nonetheless, so many native speakers of English agree with your initial intuitions, that we cannot claim that " my family members and I" is totally wrong. What is more, significant numbers of world have been talking favor this for centuries. Clbeforehand tright here is some different grammatical pattern at occupational.

I guess there are many kind of ways the phenomenon deserve to potentially be defined. To obtain even more information, it is best to relocation "my family" by somepoint for which the straight object create is not identical to the indirect object develop. A good example is " him/he and me/I" / " me/I and him/he", and with that tright here are some fascinating phenomena. See http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3469 for details and also for a discussion of possible explacountry.

My explacountry 1, which is equivalent to some of those pointed out in the Language Log article, claims that your grammatical ascendancy goes approximately as follows:

Direct object or indirect, stressed or unstressed, in English it's all the very same (immutable) except for personal pronouns.

See more: Which Term Best Describes A Proof In Which You Assume The Opposite Of What You Want To Prove

When you join words via "and", the outcome is never an individual pronoun, even when some of the constituents are personal pronouns. As such, even complicated constructions involving a pronoun are immutable. Either "my family members and I" is correct regardless of case, or "my family and also me" is correct regardmuch less of case, or both are correct regardmuch less of instance. I.e., if one can be provided for X in "inviting X", then it can be supplied in "X invited" and vice versa.

Now we have actually decoupled the case of "I"/"me" from the context in which "my family members and I/me" occurs, but we should still select between "I" and also "me". A typical option in any Indo-European language would be the direct object instance, so "I". This is the apparent option if you have actually a little bit of formal grammar education. On the various other hand also, English likewise supplies the indirect object instance, i.e. "me", as a stressed variant of the straight object situation. (E.g. in titles. Basically in the same situations wbelow French supplies "moi" instead of "je".) So that's also a perfectly good alternative. In basic, "me" is even more idiomatic yet is rejected by many type of pedants who sindicate deny that English has stressed variants of pronouns and prescribe: "Who is that? - I!"

My explacountry additionally tells us why many type of aboriginal speakers, particularly children, say things favor "Me and my brvarious other went fishing."

My alternate explanation says that for some speakers, when a facility expression is in the indirect case, only the initially constituent gets noted as instraight situation and also the remainder continues to be in direct instance. This predicts "invite him and also she" as well as "invite her and he" as 'correct'. If any indigenous speaker really feels that these are correct (I doubt it), please soptimal up!

(This alternate explanation is not entirely insane. E.g. in Germale, when you put a string of adjectives in front of a noun that is in the dative instance, then only the first adjective -- or the write-up coming before it -- is in the dative situation, and also the others are in the nominative case. That's similar and also weirder.)