perspective, technical terms, please explain!

[SlaveMasterUK]

Can anyone please explain or point me to somewhere that will explain the meaning of all these technical terms like 'omniscient' etc? I know how my writing perspectives work but I don't know what the proper terms are. All the recent threads with long technical words in suggest that other people here know what the terms mean, and I'm willing to learn...

thanks,
ax

 

[Guest]

Hi Ax. Try these, pretty basic I think. There's lots out there, books full.

regards, Perdita

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/lit_term.html

http://acunix.wheatonma.edu/rpearce/Modernism/Fiction/Point_of_View/point_of_view.html

http://www.ksu.edu/english/baker/english251/cc-foil_pv.htm

http://web.uvic.ca/wguide/Pages/LTPointOfView.html

 

[Weird Harold]

Can anyone please explain or point me to somewhere that will explain the meaning of all these technical terms like 'omniscient' etc? I know how my writing perspectives work but I don't know what the proper terms are.

It's more important to be able to use the various perspectives than it is to know their proper names -- unless of course you're involved in a discussion about them.

Omniscient is simply the perspective that knows "everything" -- it's not limited to what the characters and/or narrator can taste, see, hear, smell or touch -- it's the perspective to us when you want to be able to tell everything.

As long as the perspective you use is consistent and abides by the limitations of your POV, then you can call it "applesauce" and still write good stories.

 

[deliciously_naughty]

First person means you're writing from a "me/I" point of view. You only know what the main character knows, and only write from that perspective.

3rd person means that as the author, you can see into everyone's head, you know what's going on in the other room, etc.

I'm not entirely clear on "2nd person"

 

[oggbashan]

2nd Person

2nd person is:

"You did this; you did that."

"You walked into the room and saw my sex rearing its head. You fell upon it with open mouth and you sucked it dry."

Very difficult point of view to write and retain the reader's interest. Not recommended for beginners but can be made to work brilliantly but only sometimes.

3rd person is:

"He did this. She did that."

3rd person omniscient (all knowing) is:

"He looked at her and thought "What wonderful 38DDs."

She looked at him and thought "Is that a cucumber or is he really that big? I want it, cucumber or not."

They fell entwined on the bed and made mad passionate love until he was exhausted and asleep. She gazed at him wondering how long before she could rouse him to further action."

1st person is:

"I looked at her. She must have 38DDs. My erection strained at my zip begging to be let out. We grabbed each other and fell on the bed. I pumped away as long and as often as I could but fell asleep in her arms. My last thought was "What a wonderful pillow her 38DDs are.".

Og"

 

[Omni]

Dear Og

Now if they would have taught me grammar in high school worded like that, I know I could have finally got it!




Omni

 

[Pure]

For something way over the top, Germanically thorough, apparently the university of kiel. It's slow coming on modem.

http://ikarus.zfim.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/anglistik/Material/Introducing_Drama_and_Fiction_II.pdf

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Re: Dear Og

Now if they would have taught me grammar in high school worded like that, I know I could have finally got it!

Omni

If you think that's something, get Og to explain dangling participles and split infinitives.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[sailorm72003]

For something way over the top, Germanically thorough, apparently the university of kiel. It's slow coming on modem.

http://ikarus.zfim.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/anglistik/Material/Introducing_Drama_and_Fiction_II.pdf

And for when your head is spinning while attempting to analyse it all, one of my favorite essays by Mark Twain on language is That Awful German Language , makes me laugh out loud every time.

http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/awfgrmlg.html

Sailor

 

[Uther_Pendragon]

I'll try.
The first thing to remember is that these terms were
invented to facilitate *literary criticism*. They don't
cover everything you might use in actual writing.
"Perspective" or "point of view" means two subtly different
things. 1) The viewpoint from which the story is told:
John and Mary have sex, do you tell the story from the
perspective of John, of Mary, of a fly on the wall, or of
the bed?
2) The *type* of viewpoint: Telling the story "John did,
John saw, John felt," is third-person so is telling the
story "Mary did, Mary saw, Mary felt." Those are different
stories about the same events, but they have the same name.
"First person" means that you relate what happens from the
perspective of ME. "I did this, I saw her ..."
"Third person, limited" means that you relate the story in
terms of the actions and ONE person's thoughts and feelings.
"Third person, omniscient" means that you relate the story
in terms of what happens and the thoughts and feelings of
whomever you choose. "John felt..., Mary thought ..., the cat who had to move off the bed for them wondered why they were behaving like that."

 

[SlaveMasterUK]

OK that pretty much explains it for now... I'll leave the technical details and stick with the writing!

thanks!

 

[Uther_Pendragon]

Sorry, I filled the space last time, and wasn't finished.
You always have to keep in mind the order in which ideas enter the language.
Some authors wrote stories in which the thoughts of various characters were reported. Litcrits labeled that "3rd person omniscient." Now, "omniscient" comes from the Latin for "knowing everything" and it had earlier been used in thology. That doesn't mean that the litcrits (much less the authors they ahd been discussing) meant that the narrators actually knew everything like God.
Second, just because litcrits distinguish Oregon from Ohio doesn't mean that AUTHORS can't use Minnesota or Florida. Less figuratively:
You can write the story telling only externals with no reporting of anybody's thoughts.
You can report the thoughts of the two main characters, but not of the secondary characters.
You can switch between characters in terms of whose perspective the story is being told from. (I've seen this done with first-person as well, not often done decently.)
There is the "Watson" perspective, a first-person narration by a secondary character.
And, when you stick to the thoughts of one character, you can report events he doesn't perceive or choose not to.
If the story of John and Mary is being told from Joh's perspective, do you say "Mary did..." or do you say Johen felt Mary do ..."?

 

[oggbashan]

Og admits to a flaw ...

Grammar is NOT my strong point. You should hear my wife on the subject. She was a language teacher; I was a geographer trained as a computer expert, manager, and now as a secondhand bookdealer. None of that qualifies me as a grammar expert.

I found the following useful and suitable for Literotica. It may appear elsewhere:

Alt.sex.stories Grammar


Celestial Grammar 1.3
(Updated Aug. 12, 1996)
by Celeste
A reader sent me the following passage, which reminded me that maybe I should
repost my Celestial Grammar:
"Seatmates May Share Their Deepest Secrets Or Their Bologna," The Wall Street
Journal, 9 Aug 1996, p. A4, col. 5:
The close confines [on airlines] sometimes bring on unwanted advances or other
bizarre behavior. Robert Cross, chairman of an aviation revenue-management
firm, recalls that on a flight from Dallas to Atlanta, he was seated next to a
woman who was feverishly scribbling in a notebook. As the flight was about to
land, she asked Mr. Cross if he wouldn't mind proofreading her work. On the
page were two paragraphs of what he delicately describes as "pornography."
"I was flabbergasted," he says. So he did the only thing he could think to do.
"I just critiqued it from a grammatical standpoint: This is a run-on sentence,
you ended this with a preposition."
I do not believe that grammar is more important than ideas. However, as a
reviewer for Celestial Reviews on alt.sex.stories, I have read many stories in
which the grammar stood in the way of what the author was trying to say. In many
cases there were a few simple errors that the authors could have easily avoided.
These mistakes annoy most readers (not just myself); and by avoiding them you
can improve the chances that your readers will understand your story.
Although these guidelines are written with a.s.s. in mind, they are equally
applicable to high school and college term papers and to numerous other
practical situations. You may quote these rules in high school and college term
papers, as long as you follow the correct format. I dare you!
The following topics are covered here:
Apostrophes
Verb tense
Run-on sentences
Sentence fragments
Commas
Semicolons
Some frequently misused words
These additional topics are covered in Advanced Celestial Grammar, which is
posted separately:
Restrictive phrases and clauses.
Dangling and misplaced modifiers.
Relative and interrogative pronouns.
1. Apostrophes
Don't make a noun plural by adding apostrophe s ('s). This rule applies to all
nouns - including proper nouns.
(The plural of Smith is Smiths, not Smith's.)
The purpose of an apostrophe with a noun is to show possession.
Example: "Sue's pussy" means the pussy that belongs to Sue (at least until she
gives it to someone else).
Some confusion arises when you use plurals with apostrophes. For example, the
"Smiths' orgy" refers to the orgy held by Mr. and Mrs. Smith. In this case,
write the plural (with the s) and just add the apostrophe (without another s).
It can get more complicated than this, but we don't want to write a grammar book
here.
2. Verb Tense.
Stick with one tense, unless you have a reason to change.
Bad: "I was walking down the street one day. I see a girl who was wearing no
bra or panties."
Better: "I was walking down the street one day. I saw a girl who was wearing
no bra or panties."
There are cases when it does make sense to change verb tenses. Just do so on
purpose.
3. Run-On Sentences.
When you are finished with a sentence, use a period and begin a new sentence.
Sometimes this becomes complicated, because many sentences contain more than one
idea (like this one.) The easiest way to deal with this is to read the sentence
and see if it expresses a coherent thought. If you are uncertain, turn it into
two or more separate sentences.
4. Sentence Fragments.
Make sure every sentence contains a full thought that makes sense.
Bad: "He kept fucking her. Until she begged him to stop.
Better: "He kept fucking her until she begged him to stop.
Actually, it's sometimes OK to have an incomplete sentence (like the one marked
"bad" above); but you should only do that on purpose. And for a good reason.
Like emphasis. Like this. But it gets distracting if you do this too often. Like
this. Improper fragments seem to occur most often when the writer has a long
sentence that concludes with a subordinate clause. The writer often incorrectly
puts the last thought into a separate sentence, like this:
Bad: "While she continued to drive him crazy by fondling his balls with her
free hand, she began to suck on his cock. Until he came in a wild explosion of
excitement."
In this example there should be a comma after cock, and a lowercase "until."
(One Freudian theory is that women make this mistake more often then men -
because they think something bad will happen if they skip a period.)
5. Commas.
A comma tells the reader to pause within a sentence. Don't overuse commas. But
don't underuse them either. In general, if the sentence is confusing because the
reader may run words together, you should add a comma. Both of the commas in my
previous sentence were necessary for this reason. Many writers would add a comma
in the previous sentence to make it "necessary, for this reason"; but that would
be a mistake. "For this reason" is closely related to the rest of the sentence.
The best way to deal with commas is to read each sentence to yourself, and to
check and see whether additional commas would make the sentence easier to read,
and to eliminate commas that make things drag needlessly. (Omitting the commas
in my preceding sentence would make it hard to figure out what I was trying to
say.) There are many more rules for commas, some of which I'll discuss later;
but the preceding commonsense rule works pretty well.
6. Semicolons.
The semicolon can be viewed as a combination of a super-comma and a half-period.
(That's why it's a period written above a comma.) That is, it can serve as a
half-period by joining two sentences into one (as in the first two rules below);
and it can serve as a super-comma by replacing a comma in situations where a
comma itself won't quite do the job (as in Rules 3 and 4). Here are specific
rules:
Use a semicolon to join two clauses when these two clauses are not joined by a
coordinating conjunction. (When they are joined by a coordinating conjunction,
use a comma - except in the case of Rule 4 below.) The coordinating
conjunctions are "and," "but", "or," and "for."
The following are all correct - at least grammatically, although the order may
be reversed socially:
I licked her pussy. Then she sucked my cock.
I licked her pussy, and then she sucked my cock.
I licked her pussy; then she sucked my cock.
In the actual context of a story, the sentences would convey a slightly
different meaning. For example, the third sentence suggests that the two
activities were more intimately connected than the first (because the author
put the two ideas in a single sentence).
Use a semicolon to join two clauses when these two clauses are joined by a
conjunctive adverb. (When they are joined by "and" plus a conjunctive adverb,
use a comma - except in the case of Rule 3 below.) Conjunctive adverbs include
words like "therefore," "however," "thus," and "furthermore." {Note: If you
have trouble recognizing conjunctive adverbs, you can ignore this rule and
simply apply Rule 1; you will almost always be correct anyway.} Example:
I licked her pussy; therefore she sucked my cock.
Even when main clauses are joined by a coordinating conjunction, use a
semicolon (instead of a comma) to join them if the clauses are very long and
complex or if they contain commas. This rule is the one about which readers
have been giving me grief. I'm simply going to state one more time that this
is the rule as it is currently taught in high school and college courses and
as it is applied by most major publishers throughout the United States. Some
people would say that the semicolon followed by a coordinating conjunction is
redundant. It would be better, they say, to just drop the conjunction and use
the semicolon alone, since that serves the purpose more efficiently. If you're
really hung up on Occam's razor, fine; do it that way. These same writers
would probably never begin a sentence with a coordinating conjunction; that
rule is no longer taught, and good writers often begin sentences with "and."
My point is that the semicolon alone is correct; but so is the semicolon
followed by a coordinating conjunction when one or the other of the clauses
contains internal punctuation or is long and complex (like this one).
Examples:
Occam's Razor is the principle, first formally stated by William of Occam,
that the most efficient way is always the best way; but Occam never had sex
with me.
"While she continued to drive him crazy by fondling his balls with her free
hand, she began to suck on his cock, until he came in a wild explosion of
excitement; and then he began to turn his own attention to her clitoris,
which he had neglected until then."
Using a comma instead of a semicolon in these example would be confusing,
because each half of the sentence already contains commas. In the second
example, a good author might instead just insert a period and omit the "and,"
especially if she is concerned about skipping a period.
Use a semicolon to separate items in a series if these items are long or
contain commas. Examples:
"In one evening Sharon had sex with Sue; her dog, Ralph; the night watchman,
Bill; and Ray, her ex-husband." {Using commas instead of the semicolons
would result in a confusing sentence, where we might think Sharon had an
even more active night: "In one evening Sharon had sex with Sue, her dog,
Ralph, the night watchman, Bill, and Ray, her ex-husband."}
"So far this week Bob has sodomized the Bobsie twins, Rachel and Randy;
fucked Millie, Alice, Patrice, and Carolyn in the hayloft; had oral sex with
Jane, Janet, Julio, and Billie Joe; and watched his sister have nearly
simultaneous sex with seven guys from the local gym. {Try reading this
sentence with commas in the place of the semicolons - and then remember that
there are still four days left in the week!}
I myself still think writers do not need all four of these rules. For over
twenty years I have survived quite well using a semicolon when a comma won't
quite do the job and when I don't really want the full stop indicated by a
period. Even if you or your teacher insists on knowing and using the four
rules stated earlier, the logic stated in the preceding sentence will make it
easier to remember and apply these more specific rules.
7. Some Frequently Misused Words
CHOOSE/CHOSE.
Choose is the present tense. It rhymes with snooze. Chose is the past tense.
It rhymes with hoes.
ITS/IT'S.
It's means "it is." Its means "belonging to it." (This is a little bit
illogical, because normally an apostrophe shows possession. But not with it.)
Its' doesn't exist.
LOSE/LOOSE.
People lose things (including their virginity and their tempers). When things
are not tight, they're loose (which rhymes with goose).
THERE, THEIR, THEY'RE.
Use their to mean "of them."
Example: "I could see their pussies through the hole in the wall."
Use there to mean "over there" or "in that place" and in the expression "there
is."
Example: "When I got there, she was already undressed."
Example: "There are lots of good stories on a.s.s."
Use they're to mean "they are."
Example: "They're going to be surprised at how good her pussy tastes."
Combined Example of All Three: "They're going to fuck their brains out when
they get there."
TO/TWO/TOO.
Two is the number of persons most frequently present in a meaningful sexual
encounter. Too means "also," as in "I'd like to fuck you too." too also means
"excessively," as in "Sometimes I masturbate too often at the grocery story."
To is a preposition, which means it comes at the beginning of a prepositional
phrase, as in "We went to the store" or before a verb, as in "I want to fuck
you."
USE/USED.
People get used to doing things. Likewise, Johnny used to fuck Janie. Use is a
present tense, as in the song, "Use me, abuse me...."
LIE/LAY.
Lie means to recline. (It is an intransitive verb - it cannot take a direct
object.) Its past tense is lay, and its perfect tense is lain. Of course, a
serious source of confusion is that lay (in addition to being a word in its
own right) is also the past tense of lie.
lie also means to state a falsehood. This is a completely different word that
has a separate dictionary entry. Its past tense is lied and its perfect tense
is has lied. (This meaning is easily understood and usually causes no
confusion. Its main relevance with regard to sex is its use in poignant
country western songs: "She was sound asleep in our double bed/And I let her
lie.") lay means to put something (or someone) down. (It is a transitive
verb.) The past tense is laid. The perfect tense is has laid. The three most
common problems with lie/lay are: (1) using lie when you mean lay (and vice
versa), (2) Using laid (instead of lay) as a past tense of lie, and (3) using
laid (instead of lain) as the perfect tense of lie.
INCORRECT
We continued to lay in bed after our orgasms.
CORRECT:
We continued to lie in bed after our orgasms.
INCORRECT
I had been watching her lay in bed for nearly an hour before she woke up.
CORRECT:
I had been watching her lie in bed for nearly an hour before she woke up.
INCORRECT
She told me to lie the dildo on the night stand.
CORRECT:
She told me to lay the dildo on the night stand.
INCORRECT
After lying the dildo on the night stand, I fucked her brains out.
CORRECT:
After laying the dildo on the night stand, I fucked her brains out.
CORRECT:
After laying her in the hay loft, I went inside and laid her sister too.
(This is grammatically correct, but it may constitute a social faux pas.)
INCORRECT
I should have lain the key to the handcuffs out of her reach before I left
the room.
CORRECT:
I should have laid the key to the handcuffs out of her reach before I left
the room.



Advanced Celestial Grammar 1.1
(Updated Aug. 12, 1996)
by Celeste
Believe it or not, there is at least one college instructor in the United States
who uses my grammar notes with his class. He says it's the best way he's ever
found to make grammar interesting. Since it's back-to-school time, I figured
this wouold be a good time to repost my Advanced Celestial Grammar.
My Grammar Notes are incomplete. The basics are in Celestial Grammar 1.3, which
I am posting at the same time that I post these Advanced Notes.
While the examples are often silly, I assure you that the rules and concepts
expressed herein are almost always correct. You can pass important tests by
knowing, understanding, and applying these rules.
The following concepts are currently covered in Advanced Celestial Grammar:
Restrictive phrases and clauses.
Dangling and misplaced modifiers.
Relative and interrogative pronouns.
1. Restrictive Phrases and Clauses.
A restrictive phrase or clause is one that is so essential to the meaning of the
sentence (or clause) that it cannot be omitted without substantially changing
the meaning of the sentence (or clause). Restrictive phrases and clauses are NOT
set off by commas. In general, when we say these phrases and clauses orally, we
do not pause when we speak them. On the other hand, non-restrictive phrases or
clauses are not considered by the writer to be essential to the meaning of the
sentence - they just add additional information. Non-restrictive information is
set off by commas. For example,
"My girlfriend who likes oral sex was with me at the movie."
If the writer punctuates the sentence in this way, he is suggesting that the
information conveyed by "who likes oral sex" is essential. The most likely
explanation is that he has more than one girlfriend, and the one who was with
him at the movie was the one who likes oral sex. The same words would have a
different meaning if they were punctuated like this:
"My girlfriend, who likes oral sex, was with me at the movie."
This would mean that he has one girl girlfriend (who likes oral sex and was with
him at the movie). By putting the words "who likes oral sex" within commas the
author is saying that they are non-restrictive - that is, they don't change the
meaning of the sentence; they just add some additional meaning.
{Here's why grammarians use the word restrictive to describe this use of commas.
In the first example, the guy has many girlfriends, and "who likes oral sex"
restricts the reference to a subset - in this case to just one of them. In the
second example, the guy has only one girlfriend, and so "who likes oral sex"
does not restrict the reference to a subset.}
I recently read the following comment in the disclaimer at the beginning of a
story:
"This is my first story, written from a woman's point of view."
I think the author meant to leave out the comma. Without the comma, the sentence
would suggest that the author had written other stories, but none of these was
written from a woman's point of view. With the comma, it means that this is the
first story he ever wrote (or published), and this first story is written from a
woman's point of view.
Technically, the same logic should be applied even to single words:
"The woman enjoyed having sex with her dog Ralph."
Without a comma between "dog" and "Ralph," this sentence technically suggests
that the woman had more than one dog, but her enjoyment was restricted to Ralph.
However, lots of good writers ignore this nuance - especially if the number of
dogs would be clear from the context or if nobody would care anyway. Another
good reason to omit the comma with a non-restrictive word or phrase occurs when
the comma would add (rather than remove) confusion. For example,
"In one evening Sharon had sex with Sue, her dog, Ralph, the night watchman,
Bill, and Ray, her ex-husband."
In this example, it's not obvious whether Ralph is the dog, the night watchman,
or a separate person. It would be more obvious that Sue had fucked only four
animate beings if the sentence were punctuated like this:
"In one evening Sharon had sex with Sue, her dog Ralph, the night watchman
Bill, and Ray, her ex-husband."
Of course, a better solution would be for Sharon to become celibate - or at
least monogamous.
2. Dangling and Misplaced Modifiers.
A misplaced modifier is a phrase that is supposed to modify one word but is
placed in the sentence in such a way that it appears to modify the wrong word. A
dangling modifier is a specific type of misplaced modifier. It just dangles
(hangs there), usually at the beginning of the sentence or clause. In the
following example, it logically sounds like the guy is sucking his own cock:
Having sucked my cock vigorously, I spread her legs and began to mount her.
The ambiguity is removed if the sentence is written like this:
Having sucked my cock vigorously, she spread her legs and invited me to mount
her.
Here's a dangling modifier I found in a story I was reviewing:
After thoroughly sucking the toes of both her feet, she sat down, placed her
stockinged feet on either side of my still erect cock and began to masturbate
me with the soles of her stockinged feet!
What this sentence literally says is that the woman sucked her own toes before
she masturbated the guy's cock. What the author meant to say was this:
After I had thoroughly sucked the toes of both her feet, she sat down, placed
her stockinged feet on either side of my still erect cock and began to
masturbate me with the soles of her stockinged feet!
Actually, either activity might be fun to watch; but the author should be clear.

Even single words can be misplaced and cause confusion. What does the following
sentence mean?
I only made love to Bob that weekend.
Literally, this means
I only made love to Bob (and did nothing else with Bob or anyone else) that
weekend.
However, the author probably meant
I made love only to Bob that weekend. (I didn't make love to Tom, Dick, or
Harry that weekend.)
Or the author might have meant
I made love to Bob only during that weekend. (I didn't make love to him prior
to or after that weekend.)
Even very good writers occasionally use misplaced or dangling modifiers. One of
my students recently found a dangling modifier in Nathaniel Hawthorne's The
Scarlet Letter. (I understand this is what the advertisements mean when they say
that the Demi Moore version is an "adaptation" of the original - the producers
cleaned up the dangling modifiers.) More to the point, here is part of a
sentence written by one of the best authors on a.s.s.:
"...we enjoyed our platonic relationship and the chance to talk about our
dates and relationships with a sympathetic member of the opposite sex."
What this author meant to say was this:
"...we enjoyed our platonic relationship and the chance to talk with a
sympathetic member of the opposite sex about our dates and relationships."
The most famous example, of course, is the sentence taken from the SAT:
"He could only masturbate after the test was over."
That must have been a rough test! What the sentence literally says was that
after the test was over all the poor guy could do was jerk off. The correct
answer put only before after, suggesting that he simply had to wait till the
test was over to do his more important solitary work. Actually, if you're
familiar with the SAT, you'll probably agree that the original sentence is
perfectly plausible.
In many cases the ambiguity is cleared up by the context. But if you have time
to revise your work, why not make it easy on your readers by putting the
modifier (in this case only in a place where it is clear what it modifies - in
this case, right before the word or phrase to which it refers)?
Here's your final exam on misplaced modifiers. Can you see why a person might
say "Ouch!" while reading this passage from an actual a.s.s. story?
Kathy helped me up from my chair and removed my shirt. Cara bent down and
untied and removed my shoes. Jennifer unbuttoned my pants and let them drop to
the floor exposing a hard-on through my boxers, which Karen quickly removed.
Just to be cautious, the author should have considered putting the final clause
in a separate sentence: "Karen quickly removed the boxers." As it is, the reader
might think Karen removed the hard-on. Snip!
3. Relative and Interrogative Pronouns: WHO and WHOM (also WHOEVER and WHOMEVER)
Technically, who and whom are either relative or interrogative pronouns. That
doesn't matter for now. The rules for using relative and interrogative pronouns
are identical.
The main rule is that the way the word is used in its clause determines the form
to use. In general, if it's a subject (nominative case) use WHO (or WHOEVER). If
it's an object of a verb or of a preposition (objective case), use WHOM (or
WHOMEVER).
If you are uncertain how to apply this rule, you can do it by ear. Simply
replace WHO by HE (or SHE) and WHOM by HIM (or HER), and see if the sentence
sounds right.
That is the man WHOM I plan to seduce tonight. (WHOM is the object of seduce.
I plan to seduce HIM tonight. "I plan to seduce he tonight" sounds absurd.)
That is the woman WHO will seduce me tonight. (WHO is the subject of will
seduce. SHE will seduce me tonight. HER will seduce me tonight sounds absurd.)

WHOM do you plan to seduce tonight? (Just answer the question: I plan to
seduce HIM (not HE) tonight.)
WHO will seduce you tonight? (Just answer the question: SHE (not HER) will me
tonight.)
In America, correct grammar is often viewed with suspicion. Therefore, some
people use WHO almost all the time, especially when it occurs at the beginning
of a sentence. Therefore, intelligent people may say the following, even though
they know each sentence is incorrect:
WHO did you fuck last night? (This should be "WHOM did you fuck last night?"
If you say it correctly, the person to whom you are speaking will know you're
either an English teacher or a narc.)
WHO do you want to sleep with tonight? (This should be "With WHOM do you want
to sleep tonight?" However, guys to whom this would be said would suspect that
they were in for an expensive and perhaps boring evening with a girl who would
say this correctly. It's just not cool.)
My impression is that in written speech, almost anyone can feel comfortable
using the proper word. I guess maybe the ordinary person thinks if you have time
to revise, then it's OK to use WHOM.
Sometimes confusion arises from the fact that WHO/WHOM appears to be part of a
different clause. However, as long as you put the word in the right clause and
follow the preceding guidelines, you will not make mistakes. Here are some more
difficult examples:
I know WHO will seduce me tonight. (Some people think that WHO is the object
of "know." This is not accurate. WHO is the subject of "seduce." The whole
clause "who will seduce me tonight" is the object of "know." You can solve the
problem by inserting HE/HIM. HE will seduce me.)
I know WHOM I plan to seduce tonight. (Some people think that WHOM is the
object of "know." This is not accurate. WHOM is the object of "seduce." The
whole clause "whom I plan to seduce tonight" is the object of "know." You can
solve the problem by inserting HE/HIM. I plan to seduce HIM.)
The issue is sometimes more difficult with WHOEVER. This is because many people
who can distinguish WHO and WHOM by ear get confused by the longer word.
I'd like to have sex again with WHOEVER seduced me last night. (Many people
incorrectly say WHOMEVER, because they think the word is the object of the
preposition "with." This is incorrect; it is the subject of "seduced." Again,
you can solve the problem by inserting HE/HIM. HE seduced me last night.)
I'd like to have sex again with WHOMEVER I seduced last night. (Many people
correctly say WHOMEVER, but they do this because they think the word is the
object of the preposition "with." This is incorrect; it is the object of
"seduced." Again, you can solve the problem by inserting HE/HIM. I seduced HIM
last night.)
That's all there is to it.


This document is part of the "Artistic Viewpoints" subsection of this site's
online library. If you're new to this site, we strongly recommend that you visit
our home page to get a better sense of all that we have to offer.

 

[raphy]

Holy shit, Ogg.. Wow..

Anyway, I don't generally know what's what - But I know what 'feels' right gramatically and what feels uncomfortable, or clumsy.

 

[oggbashan]

Holy shit, Ogg.. Wow..

Is that an expression of approval?

Og

 

[raphy]

Haha.

Yes.

 

[Guest]

The first thing to remember is that these terms were invented to facilitate *literary criticism*. They don't cover everything you might use in actual writing.

Just a clarification, Uther. The terms were in use (and helpful) for centuries before lit. crit. came on the scene. It was really not that long ago when the study of English literature was a controversy and finally admitted as a real academic area in the most hallowed of UK universities. And much literary criticism today nearly discards them all for newer terms.

It's a help knowing what they are and can do though, even in hindsight.

Perdita