Grammatical Case (was: that long subject) War of Roses/Holmes?Figg/Walpurga

[Miles]

> Geoff:
> It's interesting that in several languages, the verb "to be" takes a
> nominative and yet this "it's me" crops up. In French, which, IIRC,
> had no case structure it's "c'est moi".  Funnily enough, I don't know
> what the German situation is; although I speak the language, i don't
> recall ever wanting that phrase! Perhaps Miles can oblige on that
> point?

Miles: (putting the above snip in this thread)
To find about the needed case in a German sentence, you simply ask a 
question to which you can answer with the respective sentence. "Dies ist 
Martins Buch." (This is Martin's book). You ask: "Wessen Buch ist das?" 
(Whose book is it?), and the interrogative pronoun indicates the case, here 
"Wessen" indicates genitive. And the other way around: "Wer ist da?" (Who is 
it?) - "Wer" indicates the nominative, so the answer must be "Ich bin es!" 
or usually shorter "Ich bins!".

Would it work the same way in English?

Catlady
> I believe that the valid rules of English grammar are the ones that
> evolved from centuries of usage by natural English speakers, blessed
> with a non-elite language that wasn't taught in school and therefore
> didn't have intellectuals inventing new rules or grammar snobs trying
> to enforce old ones ("Say 'give it him', not this vulgar ignorant
> slang 'give it to him'!").

Miles:
Now, this is a philosophical question. I would agree the "wrong" habits can 
become part of the correct usage of a language. Only artificial languages 
are logical, while all grown and living languages have illogical rules and 
irregularities.
But does that mean that there's no point in correcting "new" bad habits and 
to insist in using the valid rules? The truth lies in between, if you ask 
me.

Miles, who begins to understand the problems most English speakers have with 
learning German