March 20, 2023

'Aren't I' is ungrammatical, so why is it OK?

Normally, "are" goes with a plural subject like "we" and "am" goes with "I." Yet the construction "aren't I" is perfectly correct and a great lesson on the power of idiom.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

Worst Comes to Worst? Or Worse Comes to Worst?
Posted by June on March 20, 2023

I try not to cringe when people use language in a way that seems wrong to me. My idea of what’s right, as I’ve learned the hard way, isn’t necessarily right. So who am I to judge? But though I can hold my tongue, I can’t just turn off my cringe impulse at will, as evidenced by my reaction when I hear people say, “If worst comes to worst.”

To me, that first T is like nails on a chalkboard. How can worst come to worst, I wonder, if it’s already worst? Clearly, the fear is that something already bad — a worse thing — could go even further downhill, all the way to its worst possible state. So obviously, people who use two “worsts” in this expression are botching up the logical original wording, “if worse comes to worst.”

So I scoffed and I sniffed and I silently judged every time I heard the version with two “worsts” until the year 2023 when, after about 20 years of writing about grammar, I finally looked it up.

Good thing I held my tongue. “The traditional idiom, evidenced by the Oxford English Dictionary consistently from the 16th century, is worst comes to worst,” writes Garner’s Modern English usage.
Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage reports that the expression “worst comes to worst” seems to have first appeared in print in 1597, its meaning identical to the way people use it now: “if the worst that can possibly happen does happen.” It wasn’t till more than a century later that the expression I assumed was the original, “worse comes to worst,” appeared in print.

“Presumably it was the desire to make the phrase more logical that gave rise to the variant ‘if the worse comes to the worst,’ which was first recorded in 1719, when it was used (in the past tense) by Daniel Defoe in ‘Robinson Crusoe,’” Merriam’s writes.

Interestingly, when I searched a version of “Robinson Crusoe” online, I found on page 183 “if the worst came to the worst” — with two Ts — meaning that sometime between the publication of the edition Merriam-Webster referenced and the edition I saw, someone had changed Defoe’s “worse” to “worst” in order to make it correct according to the standards of his time.

This back-and-forth supports Merriam’s central point about the two forms of this expression: “In the centuries since, this phrase has shown a stubborn unwillingness to settle into fixed form.”

Here's more in my recent column.

June Casagrande is a writer and journalist whose weekly grammar/humor column, “A Word, Please,” appears in community newspapers in California, Florida, and Texas. more

The Best Punctuation Book, Period

A Comprehensive Guide for Every Writer, Editor, Student, and Businessperson

The most comprehensive punctuation guide ever, “The Best Punctuation Book, Period” doesn’t just cover the basic rules. It delves into gray areas of punctuation left unclear by the other rule books, showing how the rules differ in four different editing styles. There's also an A to Z reference of commonly mispunctuated terms. more

Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies

A Guide to Language for Fun and Spite

What do suicidal pandas, doped-up rock stars, and a naked Pamela Anderson have in common? They’re all a heck of a lot more interesting than reading about predicate nominatives and hyphens. June Casagrande knows this and has invented a whole new twist on the grammar book. more

Mortal Syntax

Mortal Syntax takes on the 101 most frequently attacked usage choices. Dedicating one short chapter to each, Casagrande brings her subject to life, teaching English usage through lively and amusing personal anecdotes. more

It Was the Best of Sentences, It Was the Worst of Sentences

Your story may be brilliant. Your insights may be groundbreaking. Your characters may be so real you can almost touch them. But they're not worth a thing if you can't bring them to life in well-written sentences. more

  • Some Common Editing Errors: Altar, Forgo, Palate

    Eli Murphy It's great that you thought of this and pointed out the simple editing mistakes. I can understand that each editor has a particular responsibility; they are not expected to be experts in all facets of language, grammar, copy editing, or word choice. Instead, he or she is in charge of the entire department, choosing the stories, delegating writing to writers, procuring images, etc. I appreciate that you recently talked about errors that even competent editors occasionally make.

  • Subject-verb agreement in the real world

    Meredith MC Shouldn’t the writer have put dashes (or maybe parentheses) before “commonly” and after “owned” ? This would have eliminated the confusion for both writer and reader.

  • Real editing notes I gave to real writers

    Eli Murphy Well, kudos to you for providing the essential elements and imparting your knowledge in the form of notes for novice writers on one of the most crucial components, "editing." I hope it will be helpful to everyone who is looking for a way.

  • The couple is or the couple are?

    E. Raufert It has to be said: You're commenting on a fine point of grammar, but you're conjuring up wrong and bad sentences to try to explain them. First, you open with two sentence fragments.: "The couple is going to purchase the house? Or the couple are going to purchase the house?" No, everyone doesn't do it, yes, you did make a mistake. No, it's not just some question of writing style. Yes, even though you've gotten paid to do editing work. You followed up your opening errors with quotation marks around words that aren't a quotation. Your writing goes on to be consistently vague because you leave words out. I can only guess that you may be a youngster who grew up texting in the pre-speech-recognition era when kids decided it was too much trouble to thumb-type all the words. Most importantly, you wrote your piece for an American website, but you instructed its American readers to choose to use an England-only form of expression four times. It actually is simply wrong here in the U.S. Here are some examples: "The family are all","The staff are experts". No, that's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of countless reference books and textbooks. Thank you for trying, but please do fix those mistakes. They're mistakes. This leaves the question of what to do to fix yourself. You may think that I believe you should beat your brains out hammering away at reference books, but I couldn't possibly disagree with that approach more. It didn't work the first time. You may even be making mistakes because you overstudied. You need a steady diet of professional writers who do speak English correctly, and they have to be very, very good writers, or you won't read 'em. I hate to say it, but you won't find it in the work of The New York Times' new infestation of dopey, cheaper White kids. The Atlantic and The New Yorker aren't usually too bad, but I think you might actually love to read "Depth Takes a Holiday" or anything by Susan Gregory Thomas, esp. her "Broke-Ass Grouch" work. I'm not going to close by saying, "Good luck", I'm going to close by saying,"Get over yourself, even though people have paid you to edit, and get to work!"

  • A Reminder About "John and I" vs. "John and Me"

    Roy Paris The argument was between John and me http://Grammer%20Underground