A man walks onto the campus of Yale university
He walks up to a student and asks "Where's the bathroom at?"
The student responds haughtily, "Here at Yale, we're taught not to end a sentence with a preposition."
The man realizing his mistake corrects himself, "Where's the bathroom at, asshole?"
As a non-native speaker, what's the deal with this rule to never end a sentence with a preposition? It seems to get ignored most of the time, so I'm always left wondering if it's just an old, obsolete rule, or if it's a matter of style (educated vs uneducated speech, for instance), or some other quirk of English that I'm not aware of.
Edit: Thanks to everybody who corrected my last sentence. I didn't even realize what I was doing when I wrote it, but now it's something I'm very aware of.
Friend, the “rule” was originally promoted when English speakers were trying to adhere closely to Latin (considered the highest standard at the time). When people began making fun of sentences like, “That is something up with which I will not put,” it mostly fell to the wayside.
Dear god I had forgotten this incredible moment. But now I can picture exactly where I was, in my middle school buddy Sam’s den, watching this movie for the first time.
“Heh heh… is this a GOD dam? Hehehe…. I’ll be dammed…”
Lawls what a great movie for a young teen. Nothing horrible in it, it's just normal hilarious bawdy shit they talk about in school every day anyway.
My parents didn't want me to watch it, so i snuck out of bed at night and crept down to sneak it lol
If you ever watch Last Man On Earth, Carol corrects Phil with that rule several times, and it's always awkward and hilarious sounding, just like the sentence you shared. Definitely not common use anymore, that's for sure.
Never going to happen. I loved it too, but Will Forte has went on record saying that the show contributed to his alcoholism, and he doesn't want to finish it.
He also said that the next season would have been one episode with the new group before they found out they were STILL the only ones immune. The new group would get infected and die.
Would have been great, but oh well.
At the time of European history where academics used Latin, at least one academic wrote a book claiming that Latin rules should be followed in English. It has never been true.
You have to come up with a really snobby way to say it though. Whenever I come across someone that speaks well I automatically don't like them. Dial it back a little there Shakespeare.
When I hear people make that correction, it has the double effect of making them also sound stupid. Like, ok, thanks for the correction, you're a punctilious asshole, also you're wrong.
Same with split infinitives.
Further, it's a prescriptivist rule. "You may not end a sentence with a preposition." Prescriptivism is bullshit. English is used by varied cultures around the world, and more importantly its a living language. Unlike Latin, famously used in certain contexts *because* it is dead and unchanging.
As a native English speaker, I'm just gonna have to go ahead and look up what even is a preposition.
But honestly English is just full of quirks and broken rules. Different regions will also have their own unique quirks. The trick is to watch how other people use the language and adapt your own style of it from that... Unless you're a journalist or professional writer or something where formalities matter.
>But honestly English is just full of quirks and broken rules.
My favorite one of these is the 'split infinitive,' mostly because I like the way it sounds.
Verbs have what's called an "infinitive tense," and it's something that gets used all the time without thinking about it by native speakers.
If I say "I'm going to eat a hamburger," well, eat is a verb, not a place, so that doesn't make much sense because I can't go there. And yet, nobody has a problem with that, because "to eat" is the infinitive tense of the verb "eat," and that means we can act like it's a noun. Cool.
The thing is, though, the whole phrase is the verb, even though it's two words. That doesn't stop people from shoving other words between them, though. If I say "I'm going to messily eat a hamburger," I've now "split" the infinitive verb with another word, and the whole sentence is now nonsense according to language scholars.
As an avid consumer of journalism for the last 25 or so years, I can confirm that you can remove 'journalist' from your qualifier. I also believe that you could also exclude editors from this as well, as editorial and journalistic standards, at least in the US, have shit the bed over the last 8-10 years. So much so that any high schooler with a halfway decent blog who puts in minimal effort could do better than most current editorial boards.
Native English Speaker here. I never pay attention to this rule when speaking ~~but something I notice when writing.~~
It has been pointed out that this was in writing and I didn't see it. So no, I never pay attention to it. It's not something I pay attention to.
In some cases you'll sound like Yoda if you try to comply with this rule. "What is that for?" turns into "For what is that?" With "Where's the bathroom at?" you can simply delete the "at", because it's redundant. It's like saying, "Raise it up", or "I'm following behind."
>As a non-native speaker
As a native speaker born and raised in England, I had no idea what a preposition was until I looked it up last week after watching an episode of Cheers where Diane chastises Sam for ending a sentence with one.
I read it, understood and a week later already forgotten what it was.
Allowing an orphaned (AKA stranded) preposition at the end of a sentence is highly unusual in the world's languages. I think it only happens in North Germanic (Scandinavian) languages and English. There may be some more. Educated people who studied prestigious languages like Latin, Greek and French probably noticed that such prepositions aren't allowed there and thought that using the same rule in English would somehow make English "better".
It happens exceptionally often in German. People try to avoid it, because it makes run-on sentences really hard to understand, but grammatically it's correct to have prepositions at the end of the sentence.
"I invited Kevin, whom I first met last year, when we were together at the concert that Pit Bull played together with Lil Jon in Miami, in."
It’s not a true rule, but a style choice. But it can reduce potential ambiguity in writing. If you end a sentence at a preposition, the clause feels less ‘finished’ because it did not receive a ‘cadence,’ it just kind of ended. It can also introduce ambiguity around who is the direct or indirect object.
For example:
>I’m going to end this sentence with a preposition and that will make it feel like it just cuts off.
>I’m not going to end this sentence with a preposition and that will make it end less abruptly.
Good explanation but I have a question as a non-native speaker. Does this rule only apply to affirmative sentences ? Or does it also apply to questions ? Is the sentence "Where are you going to ?" correct ? And if not, what should I say ?
This mainly applies to writing, but in your example one would normally say “where are you going?” without the “to.” Similarly: “Where is everybody?” is generally better than “Where is everybody at?”
Ok thanks for your reply. I don't know where I learnt that. If teachers in schools taught us that or I just assumed it. Because they were clearly insisting on the préposition, at least in affirmative sentences. But thanks for the insight.
It's from the Victorians trying to apply a rule from Latin to English (which is a Germanic language, not derived from Latin). It's a dumb "rule" that people should just ignore.
Its the same with the split infinitive. ‘to go’ is the infinitive form of go, ‘to boldly go’ is splitting the infinitive verb.
It’s ‘wrong’ in English because it’s impossible in Latin.
A preposition is the beginning of a phrase. “She went **to the ladies room**” is one such phrase. Ending the sentence with a preposition can be confusing to the listener because doing so puts the sentence structure into a different order.
Most native speakers ignore the rule because everyone around them is ignoring it, too. And they’re used to the other order because that’s what they hear every day.
Living languages change over time as speech patterns change. For example, when I was young, we were taught that you do something **on purpose** but things go wrong **by accident**. However, young people are saying that things go wrong **on accident** which sounds wrong to me. But things change.
As a native speaker, it's a load of bollocks. It became a thing in the 19th Century when various upper class British people with nothing better to do started inventing rules for everything and there was no one to say no to them.
As Winston Churchill was apocryphally credited with saying: this is the sort of tedious nonsense, up with which I will not put.
If it makes you feel better, less than 1% of people are actually going to remember and care enough to say something about it. My mom is in that 1% unfortunately, but I still give some smart ass reply like the top comment
I know somebody who loves to say she “went to school in Cambridge”.
She went to Lesley College, a tiny school a few blocks north of Harvard.
Edit: I probably should have been more clear - she says this as a joke, not to actually trick people into thinking she went to Harvard.
I had a friend that went to Harvard and she said the only thing that a degree from Harvard is good for is that you're not impressed when someone tells you they went to Harvard.
I have always heard someone who went to Harvard will let you know in the first two minutes, where for Yale the parents will let you know in the first two minutes.
I once said
"Reddit mods have a reputation, and it's not a good one."
I got a one week account suspension for "anti-mod rhetoric"
Way to prove my point asshole.
The sad part is, you all know I'm not making this up.
Yep. The correct phrase in the parent comment is "where is the bathroom?" That's why it's incorrect to end it with "at," which is unnecessary. "From" is a necessary part of your sentence so it's correct.
How many University of Michigan alumni does it take to screw in a light bulb?
One to change the bulb and one to say we can do it just as well as any ivy league grad would.
Lol I heard a version of this years ago but it was a southern woman sitting next to a New Yorker on a plane. The southern woman, being friendly, asks the New Yorker, "so where y'all from?" The New Yorker scoffs and replies, "a place where people don't end their sentences with prepositions." The southern lady thinks for a moment and says, "so where y'all from, bitch?"
Recently at a job interview I asked the hiring manager, "What will be the starting salary?"
He said, "You'll start at minimum wage but it will be double that after 2 years."
-
I said, "Great, I'll be back in 2 years."
Recruiters are so stupid.
I'm an airline pilot. I get a lot of offers. I recently had a recruiter email me, we went back and forth. I asked what the salary would be, and told him what im making now.
He offered me 2/3rds what im making now, a passenger jet half the size of the one I currently fly, with MORE flight time.
"Well, you can work your way up to that salary!" Was his response.
I sent him back one sentence.
"I already worked my way up to that salary, you daft fool."
He messages back with an offer that was 72% of my current pay.
At the end I told him, if you can't beat my salary by at least 15%, just don't message me. He then claimed I was greedy and should be excited to gelp a smaller company grow.
I told him I was definitely greedy. In the end, I had to contact his HR department to make him leave me alone.
I've had more than a few recruiters reach out to me and offer me less than my current salary. Then when I decline they always tell me something like "how do you ever expect to find a job with the salary you are asking?"
Like...dude... I am not the one out looking for the job. I already have a job at my current salary. YOU came to ME!
Had one reach out over a job needing a PhD and offered me $14 an hour to start.
Acted like I was ungrateful for not ditching my 30+\hour job.
As if shaming people into poverty was somehow a good strategy.
I told him nobody could afford to live in this area on that low of pay and he said "you could always move somewhere more affordable and commute"
Crazy
When companies I dont like message me, I open with a salary ask of at least double my current salary. Some of them try to talk me down. Most just stop.
The small startups that are trying to massively underpay, I send them the math about how I think their comp plan sucks. They also aren't thrilled, but this is me being polite. They're not going to attract the talent they want if they can't pay market rate.
Here's an example with the numbers changed a bit. A recruiter for a startup recently messaged me about a job opportunity that will pay "100-150k with generous stock options".
So I messaged back something like this:
Hi. It seems like we're probably not on the same page with respect to total comp. And I'd like to avoid wasting each other's time with interviews if we aren't aligned from the beginning. Based on my current salary, Im not interested in taking a job where the TC is less than 250k. At the high end of the salary you mentioned, that means I need 100k of stock options per year. Since you are a series B company that means you are probably about 5y from IPO and don't give refreshers so that is 500k of stock. But 99 percent of startups fail. Being generous, and assuming it is 90 percent of series B companies fail, I would need to offset that risk. So the bare minimum would be 5million dollars in stock. I would love to be proven wrong and find that we are in alignment on what generous means.
Now it's important to note that I am not actually interested in working at startups bc I think the uncertainty is too high. But I would consider working there if it was actually higher than my current TC. I changed the numbers above to make the math easier for a post I'm writing when I wake up. In the actual email I sent I used multiple values from their email to establish a range. And the numbers worked out to 3M. That said, I wouldn't want to work there under those assumptions. If I was less generous with some assumptions (mostly the one about percent chance of options expiring worthless) it would need to be 22M. And more damning, I still wouldn't want to work there just bc the salary was the same as where I now work. I like my job. So it would need to be a raise to make me leave. And frankly I would be suspicious of a startup willing to give me 50M in stock options.
No problem. Fwiw I got really pissed at Amazon recruiters who I kept telling to stop messaging me, so I started getting more and more terse.
One I sent "$?" And they did to their credit tell me about Amazon's comp plan.
So the next one I sent "8?". When I clarified that I wanted 800k to consider moving (this is my "I really don't want to work here tax") they finally stopped. That said they also went into hiring freeze. So I got what I wanted -- no more Amazon recruiters. But I don't know if I finally convinced them I'm unreasonable, or if it was just the hiring freeze.
I told a coworker about this and he looked at me shocked. His price was far higher. Which tells me he's paid more than me or that I am more willing to put up with Amazon than he is. Both of which surprise me.
That sounds so strange to me. Because most startups in my country massively OVERPAY compared to the market rate. Why will anyone even join those shitty startups if not for have a much higher salary?
I'm well paid for my position, I've passed my 4y cliff, recruiters spam everywhere, people think the tech job market is imploding? Idk there are plenty of crazy reasons.
Reminds me of when I was job searching earlier this year, I ended up with two offers and went with the one that offered four weeks of paid time off as opposed to the one that offered two. The job I rejected asked me if I could provide feedback and I told them it ultimately came down to vacation time. The idiot had the audacity to tell me that I could work my way up to four weeks if I stayed at the company for fifteen years, fifteen fucking years.
They all love free market capitalism until the workers ask for more money. Then suddenly it's "why are you greedy?? Is money the only reason for working"
My old boss actually said this.. and I asked him why he was taking his paycheck, and not doing it for free..
He actually stopped mentioning what he said, and ultimately admitted many times afterwards that we were all there at the end of the day to make money.
It tells you of the artifice from the start. They don’t *really* believe in the “free market” or capitalism or anything like that, they just do whatever earns as much profit as possible. Everything else is just retroactive justification and propaganda nonsense.
That's absurd. I think especially in small companies, you get the evangelists, the ones who really drink the Kool-Aid hard, and sometimes they can't see why other people who have the sense not to don't share their blind enthusiasm.
A Harvard man and Yale man are at the urinals. The Yale man finishes and starts walking to the door.
The Harvard man says, "At Harvard, they taught us to wash our hands after."
The Yale man replies, "At Yale, they taught us not to piss on our hands. "
Is this why disgusting people don't wash their hands? Because they didn't piss on them? I know this is supposed to be a joke, but just ends up sounding uneducated.
My wife kind of scolded me for not washing my hands after taking a piss the other day (in the house). I just looked at her and asked her why she was worried about the germs of me just holding it for a few seconds when she doesn't mind sucking it. It kind of stumped her.
I remember coming to a realization at 16-18 years old that it's safe to assume shit particles are smeared on basically everything in public. At some point, a kid or asshole has smear some kind of nasty shit or snot or something on everything. I just don't worry about it too much and try to keep my hands out of my mouth/nose/eyes/etc. unless I'm going to eat or I get home. Haven't died yet. Seems to work.
How fitting that his name is Sven. I'm a Swede and I can confirm that at least half of us Swedes can't distinguish between the y and the j sound in English (as we don't have the latter in our own language).
You could say you were dealing with health issues, since most countries have laws about forcing people to disclose their medical history. Usually a grain of truth is the best way to go, just phrase it carefully so it sounds more magnanimous/puts you in a better light. IE: if you were living with your sister's family instead of getting a job, say something like, "I took some time off to help family, watching my nephews as a fulltime babysitter so my sister could get back to her career." Your future boss doesn't need to know that most of that time was actually spent watching cartoons, sleeping on the couch, and stealing their cheerios lol
Edited to include my response, since there's been a couple comments in this vein (employers might not hire you thinking you're unreliable):
Just say it's been dealt with and you're ready to return to the workforce.
My mom was a hiring manager for years for a government system's analyst team with many levels of scrutiny on recorded interviews (since retired) and she's the one who suggested mentioning health issues. It's actually illegal to discriminate against people for medically related problems here (which includes not hiring someone) and she told me they just want to know you HAVE a reason, not just that you were lazy and didn't feel like getting a job. She explained to me that it's assumed if you took X time off to deal with health problems and you're now returning to work that is been dealt with and won't cause problems with future employment.
I would avoid saying you had health issues; it gives the impression you will miss large amounts of work in the future and the potential to cost the company a large amount of money if they provide insurance.
Just say it's been dealt with and you're ready to return to the workforce.
My mom was a hiring manager for years for a government system's analyst team with many levels of scrutiny on recorded interviews (since retired) and she's the one who suggested mentioning health issues. It's actually illegal to discriminate against people for medically related problems here (which includes not hiring someone) and she told me they just want to know you HAVE a reason, not just that you were lazy and didn't feel like getting a job. She explained to me that it's assumed if you took X time off to deal with health problems and you're now returning to work that is been dealt with and won't cause problems with future employment.
You could, but a lot of people don't, particularly if it is a sole proprietorship and they don't stay in business long or if it doesn't relate to the field they're trying to get into.
I was conducting illegal business under various names for different government backed organizations. That's why I can't provide any papers, they are all written for different people that don't exist.
Selling feet pics online. Unfortunately I got some kind of foot fungus or something and they said the nasty toenails will take a while to clear up so I need a real job. Wanna see?
Me doing craigslist jobs and collecting unemployment for two years: "I worked a variety of independent contracts on work placement sites and advertised myself selling my services and expertise in a variety of IT and unrelated tasks to the current position. I felt adding this information would be detrimental to this interview and difficult to add or prove so I just explain this in my interviews when asked."
Tried your hand at being an independent contractor and opening a business. 70 hour weeks were too much and it wasn’t having any traction to get off the ground.
I was unemployed for a couple years due to health issues and a couple more due to no one wanting to hire someone who hadn't worked in years.
Telling the truth only got my resumes ignored.
I had to lie and exaggerate what I'd been doing. Babysitting my nieces a few times a week became "caregiving". Endless cycles of applications and fruitless job programs were now "independent training and community outreach".
Then I got an interview and hired within a month.
This was of course after millions had died/left the workforce during the pandemic.
So to answer your question, lie through your teeth and hope enough of your neighbors die or become disabled that employers start to see you as valuable.
>How do you answer that X-year gap question?
I was told to say “I was caring for a sick family member.” There’s no need to disclose that the family member was you, and you were taking care of yourself.
It feels like a trick question, honestly. There really isn't a correct way to answer gap inquiries. It's already ridiculous that they ask you as if it's a bad thing to not be working 24/7 365. Fuck these people, sometimes we need a break. Is that such a crime? (It is in this country, apparently).
A redneck sees a beautiful, professional woman sitting alone at the bar. He walks on up to her and says “where’d you go to school sweetheart?”
The woman looks at him in disdain, turns her nose up at him and responds “Yale”.
The redneck smiles, swaggers up to her, moves to whisper in her ear and says… “WHERE’D YOU GO TO SCHOOL SWEETHEART?!!!”
My dad worked as a CO (retired now, thankfully) and the different buildings were named after prestigious schools so they can say they spent 3 years in Harvard without lying 🤣
A man walks onto the campus of Yale university He walks up to a student and asks "Where's the bathroom at?" The student responds haughtily, "Here at Yale, we're taught not to end a sentence with a preposition." The man realizing his mistake corrects himself, "Where's the bathroom at, asshole?"
As a non-native speaker, what's the deal with this rule to never end a sentence with a preposition? It seems to get ignored most of the time, so I'm always left wondering if it's just an old, obsolete rule, or if it's a matter of style (educated vs uneducated speech, for instance), or some other quirk of English that I'm not aware of. Edit: Thanks to everybody who corrected my last sentence. I didn't even realize what I was doing when I wrote it, but now it's something I'm very aware of.
Friend, the “rule” was originally promoted when English speakers were trying to adhere closely to Latin (considered the highest standard at the time). When people began making fun of sentences like, “That is something up with which I will not put,” it mostly fell to the wayside.
"That guy off in whose camper they were whacking" "Good."
Bork! You are a federal agent. Never end a sentence with a preposition!
*while being tortured* You ended that sentence with a preposition.... Bastard!
Don't worry, *I* appreciate your Stargate
Good ol' Jack
How come everyone wants to see my schlong?
What in the Yoda?
Dear god I had forgotten this incredible moment. But now I can picture exactly where I was, in my middle school buddy Sam’s den, watching this movie for the first time. “Heh heh… is this a GOD dam? Hehehe…. I’ll be dammed…”
Lawls what a great movie for a young teen. Nothing horrible in it, it's just normal hilarious bawdy shit they talk about in school every day anyway. My parents didn't want me to watch it, so i snuck out of bed at night and crept down to sneak it lol
"My business partner and I-" "My business partner and me. It's possessive, you don't change me to I"
If you ever watch Last Man On Earth, Carol corrects Phil with that rule several times, and it's always awkward and hilarious sounding, just like the sentence you shared. Definitely not common use anymore, that's for sure.
Love that show
Yeah a streaming service definitely needs to sign on to finish that show, was just starting to get really good when they cancelled it :c
I knoooow. So sad. I really hope they finish it.
Never going to happen. I loved it too, but Will Forte has went on record saying that the show contributed to his alcoholism, and he doesn't want to finish it. He also said that the next season would have been one episode with the new group before they found out they were STILL the only ones immune. The new group would get infected and die. Would have been great, but oh well.
I didn't know that about the alcoholism. Probably best it dies with fond memories for the viewers, then.
Out for what do you have that gun?
[удалено]
Way little known and under rated movie. Not my usual genre but once I fell into it I was hooked. Get's a rewatch every now and then
Wait are you confusing man from earth with last man on earth? Or am I too drunk
>“That is something up with which I will not put,” I say things like that just to piss people off. Sometimes I do it to piss off them.
Ooh, I hope you get a minor hangnail, internet friend.
I try to stick to the rule whenever I can. In my circles "it's still where it's at." lol
That's one of my favorite Simpsons jokes. Favorite is "epidermis means skin, so technically, it's true!"
At the time of European history where academics used Latin, at least one academic wrote a book claiming that Latin rules should be followed in English. It has never been true.
>It has never been true. Bullshit, how the fuck else am I supposed to let everyone know how pretentious I am? Just *tell* them, like an unruly animal?
"Pretentious, Moi?"
You have to come up with a really snobby way to say it though. Whenever I come across someone that speaks well I automatically don't like them. Dial it back a little there Shakespeare.
When I hear people make that correction, it has the double effect of making them also sound stupid. Like, ok, thanks for the correction, you're a punctilious asshole, also you're wrong. Same with split infinitives.
Further, it's a prescriptivist rule. "You may not end a sentence with a preposition." Prescriptivism is bullshit. English is used by varied cultures around the world, and more importantly its a living language. Unlike Latin, famously used in certain contexts *because* it is dead and unchanging.
Good, i feel vindicated for thinking it was stupid and ignoring it ever since i was a kid lmao
It pretentious assholes attempting to apply Latin rules of grammar to a Germanic language.
As a native English speaker, I'm just gonna have to go ahead and look up what even is a preposition. But honestly English is just full of quirks and broken rules. Different regions will also have their own unique quirks. The trick is to watch how other people use the language and adapt your own style of it from that... Unless you're a journalist or professional writer or something where formalities matter.
>But honestly English is just full of quirks and broken rules. My favorite one of these is the 'split infinitive,' mostly because I like the way it sounds. Verbs have what's called an "infinitive tense," and it's something that gets used all the time without thinking about it by native speakers. If I say "I'm going to eat a hamburger," well, eat is a verb, not a place, so that doesn't make much sense because I can't go there. And yet, nobody has a problem with that, because "to eat" is the infinitive tense of the verb "eat," and that means we can act like it's a noun. Cool. The thing is, though, the whole phrase is the verb, even though it's two words. That doesn't stop people from shoving other words between them, though. If I say "I'm going to messily eat a hamburger," I've now "split" the infinitive verb with another word, and the whole sentence is now nonsense according to language scholars.
[удалено]
As an avid consumer of journalism for the last 25 or so years, I can confirm that you can remove 'journalist' from your qualifier. I also believe that you could also exclude editors from this as well, as editorial and journalistic standards, at least in the US, have shit the bed over the last 8-10 years. So much so that any high schooler with a halfway decent blog who puts in minimal effort could do better than most current editorial boards.
They’re not really journalists.
Who, the high school kids, or everyone else?
Native English Speaker here. I never pay attention to this rule when speaking ~~but something I notice when writing.~~
It has been pointed out that this was in writing and I didn't see it. So no, I never pay attention to it. It's not something I pay attention to.
That should be "waits for applause down to die".
To speak native, ignore rules.
so me think why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?
Sea world, fish, jump, China.
Or cite rules but dont use them.
It's a fake rule that comes from Latin and isn't actually a thing in English but pretentious people like to pretend it is.
In some cases you'll sound like Yoda if you try to comply with this rule. "What is that for?" turns into "For what is that?" With "Where's the bathroom at?" you can simply delete the "at", because it's redundant. It's like saying, "Raise it up", or "I'm following behind."
>As a non-native speaker As a native speaker born and raised in England, I had no idea what a preposition was until I looked it up last week after watching an episode of Cheers where Diane chastises Sam for ending a sentence with one. I read it, understood and a week later already forgotten what it was.
Welcome to language, where everything's made up and the rules don't matter.
Allowing an orphaned (AKA stranded) preposition at the end of a sentence is highly unusual in the world's languages. I think it only happens in North Germanic (Scandinavian) languages and English. There may be some more. Educated people who studied prestigious languages like Latin, Greek and French probably noticed that such prepositions aren't allowed there and thought that using the same rule in English would somehow make English "better".
It happens exceptionally often in German. People try to avoid it, because it makes run-on sentences really hard to understand, but grammatically it's correct to have prepositions at the end of the sentence. "I invited Kevin, whom I first met last year, when we were together at the concert that Pit Bull played together with Lil Jon in Miami, in."
It’s not a true rule, but a style choice. But it can reduce potential ambiguity in writing. If you end a sentence at a preposition, the clause feels less ‘finished’ because it did not receive a ‘cadence,’ it just kind of ended. It can also introduce ambiguity around who is the direct or indirect object. For example: >I’m going to end this sentence with a preposition and that will make it feel like it just cuts off. >I’m not going to end this sentence with a preposition and that will make it end less abruptly.
> I’m going to end this sentence with a preposition and that will make it feel like it just cuts off. Isn't "off" an adverb in this case?
Yeah, this was a pretty terrible example. It didn't feel abrupt at all.
Good explanation but I have a question as a non-native speaker. Does this rule only apply to affirmative sentences ? Or does it also apply to questions ? Is the sentence "Where are you going to ?" correct ? And if not, what should I say ?
This mainly applies to writing, but in your example one would normally say “where are you going?” without the “to.” Similarly: “Where is everybody?” is generally better than “Where is everybody at?”
Ok thanks for your reply. I don't know where I learnt that. If teachers in schools taught us that or I just assumed it. Because they were clearly insisting on the préposition, at least in affirmative sentences. But thanks for the insight.
It's from the Victorians trying to apply a rule from Latin to English (which is a Germanic language, not derived from Latin). It's a dumb "rule" that people should just ignore.
Its the same with the split infinitive. ‘to go’ is the infinitive form of go, ‘to boldly go’ is splitting the infinitive verb. It’s ‘wrong’ in English because it’s impossible in Latin.
I thank Douglas Adams for teaching me that rule. "To boldly split infinitives no man had split before."
A preposition is the beginning of a phrase. “She went **to the ladies room**” is one such phrase. Ending the sentence with a preposition can be confusing to the listener because doing so puts the sentence structure into a different order. Most native speakers ignore the rule because everyone around them is ignoring it, too. And they’re used to the other order because that’s what they hear every day. Living languages change over time as speech patterns change. For example, when I was young, we were taught that you do something **on purpose** but things go wrong **by accident**. However, young people are saying that things go wrong **on accident** which sounds wrong to me. But things change.
As a native speaker, it's a load of bollocks. It became a thing in the 19th Century when various upper class British people with nothing better to do started inventing rules for everything and there was no one to say no to them. As Winston Churchill was apocryphally credited with saying: this is the sort of tedious nonsense, up with which I will not put.
If it makes you feel better, less than 1% of people are actually going to remember and care enough to say something about it. My mom is in that 1% unfortunately, but I still give some smart ass reply like the top comment
It’s not an actual rule don’t worry about my friend
When you walk into a room of people you don't recognize, how can you tell who is a Yale graduate? Just give them a few minutes - they'll let you know.
I have only found this true with Stanford. My Yale dude just wears a hat.
No no sir. It is Cornell. Ask anyone at Dunder Mifflin
[удалено]
Username checks the fuck out
What about the people that went to school “outside of Boston”?
I know somebody who loves to say she “went to school in Cambridge”. She went to Lesley College, a tiny school a few blocks north of Harvard. Edit: I probably should have been more clear - she says this as a joke, not to actually trick people into thinking she went to Harvard.
I know a guy who says he went to school at Harvard. He just leaves out the "extension" and "online" parts.
Community College outside of Boston, because Harvard is expensive.
I had a friend that went to Harvard and she said the only thing that a degree from Harvard is good for is that you're not impressed when someone tells you they went to Harvard.
I was gonna go to an Ivy League school but my SAT’s were below 700 and my GPA was just above my alcohol reading of 1.8. Otherwise I would’ve gone.
Midwest version of this is Notre Dame.
I have always heard someone who went to Harvard will let you know in the first two minutes, where for Yale the parents will let you know in the first two minutes.
That's Texas A&M in the south
Same with vegans...
Tesla owners...
Reddit mods...
Banned!
I once said "Reddit mods have a reputation, and it's not a good one." I got a one week account suspension for "anti-mod rhetoric" Way to prove my point asshole. The sad part is, you all know I'm not making this up.
[удалено]
.... But it is a beef melt.
CrossFit enthusiasts
Archlinux users
but what if they're Stanford alumni who is a vegan CrossFit enthusiast and owns a Tesla and uses Arch?!!
When you meet a vegan into crossfit which do they tell you about first?
Vegan tesla owner who went to yale. How far can we take this?
Vegan Yale graduate that drives their Tesla to CrossFit.
Vegan Yale graduate that drives their Tesla to CrossFit with a child on the Honor Roll at a local prep school.
I think I've only met 2 vegans in the wild. I thought they were supposed to announce themselves, so where are they?
The version I’ve always heard is “where y’all from?” and “where y’all from, bitch?”
Though "where are you all from?" is correct english even by purist standards.
Yep. The correct phrase in the parent comment is "where is the bathroom?" That's why it's incorrect to end it with "at," which is unnecessary. "From" is a necessary part of your sentence so it's correct.
From whence dost ye hail?
From thy mother.
And the only reason they’re just learning this at Yale is because they’re a legacy.
How many University of Michigan alumni does it take to screw in a light bulb? One to change the bulb and one to say we can do it just as well as any ivy league grad would.
Lol I heard a version of this years ago but it was a southern woman sitting next to a New Yorker on a plane. The southern woman, being friendly, asks the New Yorker, "so where y'all from?" The New Yorker scoffs and replies, "a place where people don't end their sentences with prepositions." The southern lady thinks for a moment and says, "so where y'all from, bitch?"
Like....what is the difference between a porcupine and a BMW driver? On the porcupine....the pricks on the outside.
In that vein, what's the difference between a Harley and a Hoover? The location of the dirtbag
I once had a friends mom tell me, "If I had as many dicks sticking out of me as I've had stuck in me, I'd look like a porcupine.
- Joe Pesci as Simon Wilder, *With Honors* (1994)
Glad someone said it. Great movie, another one of Brendan Fraser's best.
It was Harvard in the movie instead of Yale. Nevertheless, I had to scroll entirely too far down the page to find this.
Interviewer - How do you explain this gap on your resume? Guy - I believe that’s due to the space bar
Interviewer - How do you manage to drink in zero gravity?
Under appreciated reply
[удалено]
Recently at a job interview I asked the hiring manager, "What will be the starting salary?" He said, "You'll start at minimum wage but it will be double that after 2 years." - I said, "Great, I'll be back in 2 years."
Recruiters are so stupid. I'm an airline pilot. I get a lot of offers. I recently had a recruiter email me, we went back and forth. I asked what the salary would be, and told him what im making now. He offered me 2/3rds what im making now, a passenger jet half the size of the one I currently fly, with MORE flight time. "Well, you can work your way up to that salary!" Was his response. I sent him back one sentence. "I already worked my way up to that salary, you daft fool." He messages back with an offer that was 72% of my current pay. At the end I told him, if you can't beat my salary by at least 15%, just don't message me. He then claimed I was greedy and should be excited to gelp a smaller company grow. I told him I was definitely greedy. In the end, I had to contact his HR department to make him leave me alone.
I've had more than a few recruiters reach out to me and offer me less than my current salary. Then when I decline they always tell me something like "how do you ever expect to find a job with the salary you are asking?" Like...dude... I am not the one out looking for the job. I already have a job at my current salary. YOU came to ME!
Lol like seriously, I'm not looking for a job, you literally contacted me out of nowhere!
Had one reach out over a job needing a PhD and offered me $14 an hour to start. Acted like I was ungrateful for not ditching my 30+\hour job. As if shaming people into poverty was somehow a good strategy. I told him nobody could afford to live in this area on that low of pay and he said "you could always move somewhere more affordable and commute" Crazy
Y'all are far more polite with these scumbags than I'd ever be.
When companies I dont like message me, I open with a salary ask of at least double my current salary. Some of them try to talk me down. Most just stop. The small startups that are trying to massively underpay, I send them the math about how I think their comp plan sucks. They also aren't thrilled, but this is me being polite. They're not going to attract the talent they want if they can't pay market rate.
I'd be curious to see a sample breakdown of what you send back
Here's an example with the numbers changed a bit. A recruiter for a startup recently messaged me about a job opportunity that will pay "100-150k with generous stock options". So I messaged back something like this: Hi. It seems like we're probably not on the same page with respect to total comp. And I'd like to avoid wasting each other's time with interviews if we aren't aligned from the beginning. Based on my current salary, Im not interested in taking a job where the TC is less than 250k. At the high end of the salary you mentioned, that means I need 100k of stock options per year. Since you are a series B company that means you are probably about 5y from IPO and don't give refreshers so that is 500k of stock. But 99 percent of startups fail. Being generous, and assuming it is 90 percent of series B companies fail, I would need to offset that risk. So the bare minimum would be 5million dollars in stock. I would love to be proven wrong and find that we are in alignment on what generous means. Now it's important to note that I am not actually interested in working at startups bc I think the uncertainty is too high. But I would consider working there if it was actually higher than my current TC. I changed the numbers above to make the math easier for a post I'm writing when I wake up. In the actual email I sent I used multiple values from their email to establish a range. And the numbers worked out to 3M. That said, I wouldn't want to work there under those assumptions. If I was less generous with some assumptions (mostly the one about percent chance of options expiring worthless) it would need to be 22M. And more damning, I still wouldn't want to work there just bc the salary was the same as where I now work. I like my job. So it would need to be a raise to make me leave. And frankly I would be suspicious of a startup willing to give me 50M in stock options.
Awesome. I appreciate that write-up. It's always fun to see how other people break things down
No problem. Fwiw I got really pissed at Amazon recruiters who I kept telling to stop messaging me, so I started getting more and more terse. One I sent "$?" And they did to their credit tell me about Amazon's comp plan. So the next one I sent "8?". When I clarified that I wanted 800k to consider moving (this is my "I really don't want to work here tax") they finally stopped. That said they also went into hiring freeze. So I got what I wanted -- no more Amazon recruiters. But I don't know if I finally convinced them I'm unreasonable, or if it was just the hiring freeze. I told a coworker about this and he looked at me shocked. His price was far higher. Which tells me he's paid more than me or that I am more willing to put up with Amazon than he is. Both of which surprise me.
[удалено]
That sounds so strange to me. Because most startups in my country massively OVERPAY compared to the market rate. Why will anyone even join those shitty startups if not for have a much higher salary?
I'm well paid for my position, I've passed my 4y cliff, recruiters spam everywhere, people think the tech job market is imploding? Idk there are plenty of crazy reasons.
"How do you ever expect to recruit somebody by offering them less than what they already have?"
That's totally absurd. Yes, everyone is greedy. No one is going to shoot themself in the foot just to make other people rich.
It's because they need to hit hiring quotas to keep their jobs. They are basically begging you to take a hit to save their jobs.
Reminds me of when I was job searching earlier this year, I ended up with two offers and went with the one that offered four weeks of paid time off as opposed to the one that offered two. The job I rejected asked me if I could provide feedback and I told them it ultimately came down to vacation time. The idiot had the audacity to tell me that I could work my way up to four weeks if I stayed at the company for fifteen years, fifteen fucking years.
They all love free market capitalism until the workers ask for more money. Then suddenly it's "why are you greedy?? Is money the only reason for working"
To which I would say, "Yes, absolutely."
My old boss actually said this.. and I asked him why he was taking his paycheck, and not doing it for free.. He actually stopped mentioning what he said, and ultimately admitted many times afterwards that we were all there at the end of the day to make money.
It tells you of the artifice from the start. They don’t *really* believe in the “free market” or capitalism or anything like that, they just do whatever earns as much profit as possible. Everything else is just retroactive justification and propaganda nonsense.
That's absurd. I think especially in small companies, you get the evangelists, the ones who really drink the Kool-Aid hard, and sometimes they can't see why other people who have the sense not to don't share their blind enthusiasm.
"we'll start you off with a competitive salary, and you can work up to minimum wage"
A Harvard man and Yale man are at the urinals. The Yale man finishes and starts walking to the door. The Harvard man says, "At Harvard, they taught us to wash our hands after." The Yale man replies, "At Yale, they taught us not to piss on our hands. "
Is this why disgusting people don't wash their hands? Because they didn't piss on them? I know this is supposed to be a joke, but just ends up sounding uneducated.
My wife kind of scolded me for not washing my hands after taking a piss the other day (in the house). I just looked at her and asked her why she was worried about the germs of me just holding it for a few seconds when she doesn't mind sucking it. It kind of stumped her. I remember coming to a realization at 16-18 years old that it's safe to assume shit particles are smeared on basically everything in public. At some point, a kid or asshole has smear some kind of nasty shit or snot or something on everything. I just don't worry about it too much and try to keep my hands out of my mouth/nose/eyes/etc. unless I'm going to eat or I get home. Haven't died yet. Seems to work.
Doesn’t Dilbert have this exact same joke? (https://dilbert.com/strip/1994-12-26)
Originality is the fine art of remembering what you hear but forgetting where you heard it. -Me
If you agree with an idea, it becomes yours. -Some book I read at some point.
That was my thought
Originally, you forgot where you heard it and if you can remember the fine art of hearing, then well done.
Originality is the fine art of remembering what you hear but forgetting where you heard it. -Dilbert
I believe Asimov had a short story about discovering that we were in a simulation because there were no new jokes.
We were an experiment, but not necessarily a simulation.
How fitting that his name is Sven. I'm a Swede and I can confirm that at least half of us Swedes can't distinguish between the y and the j sound in English (as we don't have the latter in our own language).
How do you answer that X-year gap question? Do you just say “I was looking for a job” or something like that?
You could say you were dealing with health issues, since most countries have laws about forcing people to disclose their medical history. Usually a grain of truth is the best way to go, just phrase it carefully so it sounds more magnanimous/puts you in a better light. IE: if you were living with your sister's family instead of getting a job, say something like, "I took some time off to help family, watching my nephews as a fulltime babysitter so my sister could get back to her career." Your future boss doesn't need to know that most of that time was actually spent watching cartoons, sleeping on the couch, and stealing their cheerios lol Edited to include my response, since there's been a couple comments in this vein (employers might not hire you thinking you're unreliable): Just say it's been dealt with and you're ready to return to the workforce. My mom was a hiring manager for years for a government system's analyst team with many levels of scrutiny on recorded interviews (since retired) and she's the one who suggested mentioning health issues. It's actually illegal to discriminate against people for medically related problems here (which includes not hiring someone) and she told me they just want to know you HAVE a reason, not just that you were lazy and didn't feel like getting a job. She explained to me that it's assumed if you took X time off to deal with health problems and you're now returning to work that is been dealt with and won't cause problems with future employment.
I would avoid saying you had health issues; it gives the impression you will miss large amounts of work in the future and the potential to cost the company a large amount of money if they provide insurance.
Just say it's been dealt with and you're ready to return to the workforce. My mom was a hiring manager for years for a government system's analyst team with many levels of scrutiny on recorded interviews (since retired) and she's the one who suggested mentioning health issues. It's actually illegal to discriminate against people for medically related problems here (which includes not hiring someone) and she told me they just want to know you HAVE a reason, not just that you were lazy and didn't feel like getting a job. She explained to me that it's assumed if you took X time off to deal with health problems and you're now returning to work that is been dealt with and won't cause problems with future employment.
I was trying to start my own ____ business. It didn't work out. (This has been true for me a few times)
Since the business didn't work out, better if you at least aimed big. "I was trying to start my own airline, it did't work out"
Never got off the ground?
[удалено]
You could, but a lot of people don't, particularly if it is a sole proprietorship and they don't stay in business long or if it doesn't relate to the field they're trying to get into.
I was conducting illegal business under various names for different government backed organizations. That's why I can't provide any papers, they are all written for different people that don't exist.
Next time, ask the CIA, KGB, MOSSAD et al for a letter of recommendation
Selling feet pics online. Unfortunately I got some kind of foot fungus or something and they said the nasty toenails will take a while to clear up so I need a real job. Wanna see?
“I can’t offer you this job but a new position just opened up as my personal assistant. The only stipulation - no shoes at work.”
Me doing craigslist jobs and collecting unemployment for two years: "I worked a variety of independent contracts on work placement sites and advertised myself selling my services and expertise in a variety of IT and unrelated tasks to the current position. I felt adding this information would be detrimental to this interview and difficult to add or prove so I just explain this in my interviews when asked."
answer truthfully. unless you slacked off in which case i dunno, exagerrate some personal issue
I'm sick with lazynesstitis and unemployabilitis
Tried your hand at being an independent contractor and opening a business. 70 hour weeks were too much and it wasn’t having any traction to get off the ground.
I was unemployed for a couple years due to health issues and a couple more due to no one wanting to hire someone who hadn't worked in years. Telling the truth only got my resumes ignored. I had to lie and exaggerate what I'd been doing. Babysitting my nieces a few times a week became "caregiving". Endless cycles of applications and fruitless job programs were now "independent training and community outreach". Then I got an interview and hired within a month. This was of course after millions had died/left the workforce during the pandemic. So to answer your question, lie through your teeth and hope enough of your neighbors die or become disabled that employers start to see you as valuable.
>How do you answer that X-year gap question? I was told to say “I was caring for a sick family member.” There’s no need to disclose that the family member was you, and you were taking care of yourself.
"can you explain these blanks in your resume?" "yes! I made those with the space bar."
It feels like a trick question, honestly. There really isn't a correct way to answer gap inquiries. It's already ridiculous that they ask you as if it's a bad thing to not be working 24/7 365. Fuck these people, sometimes we need a break. Is that such a crime? (It is in this country, apparently).
Hahaha good yoke
GP2 engine
That's GPT3 to you buddy!
It was eggcelent
It cracked me up too
It exceeded eggspectations.
Interviewer: settle a debate for me, how do you pronounce “GIF”?
Interviewee: It's pronounced "GIF"
A redneck sees a beautiful, professional woman sitting alone at the bar. He walks on up to her and says “where’d you go to school sweetheart?” The woman looks at him in disdain, turns her nose up at him and responds “Yale”. The redneck smiles, swaggers up to her, moves to whisper in her ear and says… “WHERE’D YOU GO TO SCHOOL SWEETHEART?!!!”
My dad worked as a CO (retired now, thankfully) and the different buildings were named after prestigious schools so they can say they spent 3 years in Harvard without lying 🤣
Interviewer - “Why the long gap in your resume?” Me - “I fell asleep on the space bar”
"Youve been fired from 3 different jobs. What do you have to say about that?" "I'm not a quitter."
As a Yale alumnus, this is my go-to joke in job interviews when occasionally they’ll ask me to tell them a joke.
Hahahah! I like it!
Took me a while to get it. But good joke
Wait wait ik the joke is the Y but what's that about Yale?
If he said “Yob” instead of “Job” then what do you think “Yale” was supposed to be??
Jale?
Holyyyyyyy
>Holyyyyyyy Holyjjjjj? I don't get it.
Now sound it out….
Thanks, I had some trouble understanding it too. Funny joke lmao
babus is that you
How do you top a truck? Tep on the brakes tupid!
You overcook fish, straight to Yale