How do I know when to use Jon and I, or Jon and me? I can't really figure it out. I've tried to teach myself, but I just can't seem to do it. Will someone please help me figure this problem out?
From this, I would tentatively conclude that (1.) the vernacular pronunciation of the name became a single-syllable "Jon" fairly early on, and (2.) the John spelling might have originally been a Latin-language abbreviation, but it came to be used as the standard vernacular spelling because it matched the vernacular pronunciation.
The main difference between lying and not using a comma in "Thanks, John", in your analogy, is that lying is a deliberate act of deception that often has negative consequences for the person being lied to, whereas dropping that comma is unlikely to have any negative consequences for the reader and is often not done deliberately. It's a poor analogy.
Is "I am sat" bad English? I believe it is incorrect and instead either the present continuous I am sitting or the predicate adjective I am seated should be used. I hear this quite often, howe...
As per Jon Hanna's second example, you can also use this parenthetically: My manager (copied) will need to provide approval My manager (copied in) will need to provide approval As per MT_Head's comment you may also see "copy on ", although to me it sounds more natural to use "copy in on ": I've copied my manager on this email as...
It is formally correct to say 'with John and me' or 'with me and John', but the first one is the preferred style in print or in school (as Peter and John said). 'with me and John' sounds informal because of this style choice. Also 'with John and I' is formally incorrect (prepositions in English take the accusative case), but there is a tendency nowadays for people to say it because, by ...
Is there a gender-neutral alternative to "Jane Doe" / "John Doe"? I would like to provide an example of signed form, but how to avoid using gender when it comes to names? Is there some widely-used
John Doe is very generic, rolls off the tongue, and in colloquy is not easily mistaken for a known person, like "John Smith" might be (there was at least one very famous John Smith, and though that name is commonly equated with anonymity the usage is less formal). The John Doe name itself has a very long history; English records of anonymous or unknown persons being called John Doe date back ...
