Is it a rule worth believing in? Is it a rule worth caring about (See, I just did it. Twice in a row!!)
I don't know what it is about middle-age, but one thing that's become glaring (and before which, wasn't so glaring) is that journalists, screenwriters, columnists, etc. don't seem to care any more about proper sentence structure.
I am, of course, guilty of this myself (one of my pet problems, is using far too many commas).
So, I thought I'd consult Mr. Google, to find out the present status of this ancient rule.
And the first thing I found, is that it ISN'T an ancient rule.
It was John Dryden, the 17th-century poet and dramatist, who first promulgated the doctrine that a preposition may not be used at the end of a sentence. Grammarians in the 18th century refined the doctrine, and the rule has since become one of the most venerated maxims of schoolroom grammar. But sentences ending with prepositions can be found in the works of most of the great writers since the Renaissance. In fact, English syntax not only allows but sometimes even requires final placement of the preposition.
(The American Heritage Book of English Usage, Houghton Mifflin, 1996)
One of the learned who obeyed and promulgated the rule was Hugh Blair in Lecture XII of his Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (1783):
A fifth rule for the strength of Sentences; which is, to avoid concluding them with an adverb, a preposition, or any inconsiderable word. Such conclusions are always enfeebling and degrading....Agreeably to this rule, we should always avoid concluding with any of those particles which mark the case of nouns,--of, to, from, with, by. For instance, it is a great deal better to say, "Avarice is a crime of which wise men are often guilty," than to say, "Avarice is a crime which wise men are often guilty of." This is a phraseology which all correct writers shun, and with reason. For, besides the want of dignity which arises from these monosyllables at the end, the imagination cannot avoid resting, for a little, on the import of the word which closes the Sentence: And, as those prepositions have no import of their own, but only serve to point out the relations of other words, it is disagreeable for the mind to be left pausing on a word, which does not, by itself, produce any idea, nor form any picture in the fancy.
It has only been recently that I, myself, have noticed when other people make this "mistake." I don't, however, notice sentences I do this with (see!).
But the word itself displays where in the sentence it belongs.
Pre-position.
Don't laugh, as there ARE postposition words too. There are even cases of circumposition!
So, is it merely a recent phenomenon, that grammar bibles have given up on this rule? Hardly. Those who wish to see the rule banished date as far back as 1902:
Some teachers and some text-books maintain that a sentence should never end with a preposition or with any other insignificant word. "A preposition," said a college professor to his class, is a bad word to end a sentence with." If his practice had squared with his theory, he would have said, "A preposition is a bad word with which to end a sentence"; but his instinct for language was stronger than his doctrine.
(Beginnings of Rhetoric and Composition, Adams Sherman Hill, American Book Company, 1902)
Or here in 1926:
It was once a cherished superstition that prepositions must be kept true to their name and placed before the word they govern in spite of the incurable English instinct for putting them late. . . . Those who lay down the universal principle that final prepositions are "inelegant" are unconsciously trying to deprive the English language of a valuable idiomatic resource, which has been used freely by all our greatest writers except those whose instinct for English idiom has been overpowered by notions of correctness derived from Latin standards.
(A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, Henry W. Fowler, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1926)
Is it a rule worth believing in? Is it a rule worth caring about (I did it again!! Twice in a row!!!)
I know that when I hear a Brit speak with "proper English" it does sound more elegant to me. And one of the reasons is, that they adhere to a rule (among others) that we Americans have very nearly banished.
Along with a brisk discussion by resident grammarians, as to the efficacy of this rather old rule, please feel free to point out other grammar no-no's I have unknowingly committed, within this very diary.
And most importantly, is the rule still being taught to our children?
Ta!