OddThomas
03-14-2009, 11:30 AM
Today I read a news article from Reuters, a respected news source. This is the dateline and first sentence:Fri Mar 13, 6:57 pm ET NEW YORK (Reuters) – Lawyers for jailed swindler Bernard Madoff argued for his release pending sentencing and a list of assets put he and his wife's net worth between $823 million and $826 million, according to court papers filed on Friday.
I have mentioned my low opinion of the quality of the writing of reporters of even the finest news organizations before, and this one sentence does not disappoint. Indeed, I was stopped cold by the phrase he and his wife's net worth. Some hours later, and after a bit of research, I was moved to write this post explaining the error, and ways to avoid it.
The authors (there are two) of the sentence wished to say that Mr. and Mrs. Madoff share a net worth of a certain amount. They could have said the Madoffs' net worth, they could have said Mr. and Mrs. Madoff's net worth, or they could have said their net worth, but they didn't. They were already writing of Mr. Madoff, so he was their topic, and the writers must have wanted to refer to him with a pronoun. So they chose he.
Now, pronouns differ from nouns in that they have cases: nominative, objective, and possessive. Mr. Madoff, who owns the money, must appear in the possessive case. He should therefore be his. By this reasoning, the phrase ought to be his and his wife's net worth.
But that is not the end of it. According to another grammar rule, in a compound possessive both nominals are to be possessive only when both possess separate things, such as his and his wife's cats (they each have their own cats). This rule confounds the first rule. By making he into his, we are forced into thinking that net worth must be plural, which we know isn't true.
I feel certain this is why the authors left he as is. However, the second rule is a rule more of style than of grammar, while the first rule is an absolute rule of grammar, having to do with case. Case is to be honored at all times. (Permissible exceptions might include It's me, and Who is it for?)
What should the authors have done? I think I have given the answer very early in my post. They could have said the Madoffs' net worth, Mr. and Mrs. Madoff's net worth, or their net worth. If you are faced with something similar, such as her and her mother's tickets, your and your brother's cat, your and my table, these solutions work: their tickets, your cat, our table.
I have mentioned my low opinion of the quality of the writing of reporters of even the finest news organizations before, and this one sentence does not disappoint. Indeed, I was stopped cold by the phrase he and his wife's net worth. Some hours later, and after a bit of research, I was moved to write this post explaining the error, and ways to avoid it.
The authors (there are two) of the sentence wished to say that Mr. and Mrs. Madoff share a net worth of a certain amount. They could have said the Madoffs' net worth, they could have said Mr. and Mrs. Madoff's net worth, or they could have said their net worth, but they didn't. They were already writing of Mr. Madoff, so he was their topic, and the writers must have wanted to refer to him with a pronoun. So they chose he.
Now, pronouns differ from nouns in that they have cases: nominative, objective, and possessive. Mr. Madoff, who owns the money, must appear in the possessive case. He should therefore be his. By this reasoning, the phrase ought to be his and his wife's net worth.
But that is not the end of it. According to another grammar rule, in a compound possessive both nominals are to be possessive only when both possess separate things, such as his and his wife's cats (they each have their own cats). This rule confounds the first rule. By making he into his, we are forced into thinking that net worth must be plural, which we know isn't true.
I feel certain this is why the authors left he as is. However, the second rule is a rule more of style than of grammar, while the first rule is an absolute rule of grammar, having to do with case. Case is to be honored at all times. (Permissible exceptions might include It's me, and Who is it for?)
What should the authors have done? I think I have given the answer very early in my post. They could have said the Madoffs' net worth, Mr. and Mrs. Madoff's net worth, or their net worth. If you are faced with something similar, such as her and her mother's tickets, your and your brother's cat, your and my table, these solutions work: their tickets, your cat, our table.