|
Imagine a world where you aren't anything but a hound dog and where you cannot get any satisfaction.
Sound boring? That's because it's too proper. It ain't good grammar you're looking for, babe.
Great music often thrives on breaking  the rules: unexpected chords, shifting keys, lyrical surprises. Once in awhile, that includes a line that an English teacher might despise.
"What if God was one of us?"
What if Joan Osborne were to have used the subjunctive?
Here are some grammatically challenged lines we dug up from popular songs. We presented each to a word gal and a music guy -- Mignon Fogarty, who runs the Grammar Girl podcast (http://www.qdnow.com ) and Steve Seel, the music host of Minnesota Public Radio's The Current.
What's the broken rule, and does it matter? Their responses below.
___
 SONG: "If You Love Somebody Set Them Free," by Sting
OFFENDING LINE: "If you love somebody, if you love somebody, if you love someone, set them free."
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: "Someone" is singular, so technically he should have sung, "If you love someone, set her free," or "...set him free," or "...set him or her free."
DJ STEVE SAYS: That's the way we talk as normal human beings. Imagine the alternative. If he were to say "his," then everyone would be sitting around talking about it and we'd all be wasting our time talking about this otherwise likable but forgettable Sting song.
———
 SONG: "Ironic," by Alanis Morissette
OFFENDING LINE: "Isn't it ironic ... don't you think?/It's like rain on your wedding day/It's a free ride when you've already paid."
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: Many of the situations in this song aren't ironic; they're just unfortunate. Irony roughly means the outcome of the story is different from what would be expected. In the song, there's no reason to think it might not rain on a wedding, unless the bride is a meteorologist who had purposefully traveled to the desert to avoid rain. That would be ironic.
DJ STEVE SAYS: I remember a bunch of stodgy coots arguing that Alanis wasn't presenting irony in this song at all, but instead just examples of extraordinarily bad luck. Everybody in the world understood what Alanis was saying, except for these fussbudgets who were looking for a pop song to disparage.
———
 SONG: "Not Fade Away," by Buddy Holly & The Crickets
OFFENDING LINE: "I'm a-gonna tell you how it's gonna be/You're gonna give your love to me/I wanna love you night and day/You know my love a-not fade away."
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: "Fade" is the base form of the verb, and you can't use it in this sentence without an auxiliary verb. For example, "You know my love WILL not fade away."
DJ STEVE SAYS: I don't see that one as bad grammar as much as just sort of odd and idiosyncratic, and that's valid. Idiosyncrasy isn't wrong. Idiosyncrasy is critical, in fact. Art needs it.
———
 SONG: "21 Questions," by 50 Cent
OFFENDING LINE: "Girl ... it's easy to love me now/Would you love me if I was down, and out?/Would you still have love for me?"
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: 50 Cent is talking about a hypothetical future situation (becoming poor) that is contrary to his current situation (he's rich), so the lyrics should be in the subjunctive case: "Would you love me if I were down and out?"
DJ STEVE SAYS: It doesn't bother me, coming from a song, because pop songs are a vernacular art. Pop music uses colloquial language -- an understood language that's separate from formal English.
———
 SONG: "Between You & I," by Jessica Simpson
OFFENDING LINE: "Between you and I/And the stars that light up the sky/Nothing and no one would ever know..."
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: This should be "between you and me." "Between" is a preposition, and words that follow a preposition have to be in the objective case. "Me" is objective. ("I" is nominative.)
DJ STEVE SAYS: (People) know that "between you and me" sounds more natural, so they think that must be wrong. Rather than blame the speaker for not knowing the rules regarding the objects of prepositions, I really have to blame the grammar nannies. I think it's the grammar-nanny hyper-vigilance that has created this one.
———
SONG: "Who Do You Love?" by Bo Diddley
OFFENDING LINE: "And tell me who do you love? Who do you love? Who do you love? Who do you love?"
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: It should be "Whom do you love," because the person being loved is the object in the sentence, and the rule is that you use "whom" when referring to an object and "who" when referring to a subject.
DJ STEVE SAYS: I gotta say, "WHOM do you love?" OK, sure, try to hear that in your imagination. And if you actually think that sounds better, we have nothing to discuss. "WHOM do you love?" That's absurd on its face. The song itself is, just like all Bo Diddley, practically an incantation. So expending energy on correct grammar is spoiling the effect.
———
 SONG: "Lay Down Sally," by Eric Clapton
OFFENDING LINE: "Lay down, Sally, and rest you in my arms./Don't you think you want someone to talk to?"
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: In the present tense, a person lies down or lays down an object. To say "lay down Sally" would only be correct if Eric Clapton was giving someone a command (in an imperative sentence) to go grab Sally and lay her down somewhere.
DJ STEVE SAYS: That song has been around for so long that I forgot it was incorrect. If somebody were to say to me, "Come over here and lay down," I would catch it. But within the context of the song, it doesn't bother me.
———
SONG: "Take the Money and Run," by Steve Miller Band
OFFENDING LINE: "Billy Mack is a detective down in Texas/You know he knows just exactly what the facts is."
GRAMMAR GIRL SAYS: This is a very obvious problem with subject-verb agreement. "Facts" is plural and requires a plural verb: are.
DJ STEVE SAYS: All right, come on. That's a genius line. In fact, it's even funny, because Steve Miller knows it's bad grammar, I think, and he's using it to make a rhyme. So to me, it's Gilbert and Sullivan meets twangy guitar rock. I've always loved that line.
___
Hillary Rhodes is an asap staff reporter in New York.
| 
