Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
Okay- maybe you can take one of my pet peeves off the list- or help explain it. It drives me crazy when baristas, clerks, cashiers, what have you greet the next person in a queue with the salutation, "Could I help who's next?" This appears to me to be a compound question, combining "Can I help the next person" with "Who's next?" Is there any proper usage or legitimate lexicography for this? The other one, an issue Harry Shearer (Spinal Tap, The Simpsons) is onto as well- people who start responses with the word "so". As in, "What did you have for breakfast?" response: "So...I woke up and was out of eggs...yada, yada..." Help us, Obi Wan....
Sam in Stuart, FL
Welcome to the forum Sam Iam. You ask two questions. The first is unclear. I don't usual hear that expression unless another cashier opens up a new lane. When I'm just the next person in a moving line, it's more like "Hi" or "Welcome" (if anything).
As far as the grammar goes:
Could I help who's next?
Can I help who's next?
May I help who's next?
All of these make sense to me, especially in colloquial situations. I don't see any of them really being a "compound question" without a significant pause between "help" and "who's" (or the insertion of a period or semicolon).
Your second question about starting sentences with "so" was discussed at length in this thread.
I don't recall hearing the "…who's next?" version.
"Could (Can, May) I help whoever's next?" seems a bit smoother to me, although if there's actually a queue I would think that it would be obvious who's next. At, say, a bar, with people jammed up three and four deep it might make more sense. Really good bartenders or baristas have a knack for keeping track of customer order, even in the midst of seeming chaos.
Your 'whoever' reminds of this old thread, in which the 3rd post (Glenn's) explains why 'He eats whatever is sweet' is valid.
'Can I help who's next?' appears to be the same structure, but the 'who' (instead of 'whoever' ) does make it somehow off, no?
It sounds like 'control/decide/choose who' or, yes, a stringing together of 2 questions.
I don't see this one being a problem. Try expanding the contraction, and you get can I help who is next? which is unobjectionable (fussy types might prefer "can I help the person/shopper who is next?", but the shorter form is perfectly grammatical).
I used to feel the same way you do about the construction don't let's be silly! When the Mad Hatter in Disney's Alice in Wonderland says it (a response to using mustard to repair his pocketwatch), it sounds regional, whimsical, archaic or simply "odd" in any number of ways as befitting a Mad Hatter, but filling out the gaps it's revealed as "do not let us be silly", which at most is just a little more formal than most people would say it (probably something along the lines of "let's not be silly").
It seems like the speaker is pressing the relative pronoun who into service as a compound relative pronoun in analogy to what. Traditionally, who does not function as a compound relative pronoun, and requires an explicit antecedent. While this use is not terribly jarring, using whoever makes it completely legit.
Can I help whoever's next?
To me Can I help who's next? or Can I help whoever's next? is impersonal and conveys a complete lack of engagement. Such lack of engagement may be reality. The clerk may indeed not care a bit about whoever's next. If they do care, their words are ill chosen. The impersonal who or whoever seems dismissive rather than inviting.
I agree completely with tromboniator that Can I help the next person? or Can I help the next customer? sounds much better, engaging, and inviting.
Glenn said: While this use is not terribly jarring, using whoever makes it completely legit.
So do you suppose that "who's" could serve as a contraction of "whoever is" as well as "who is"? I have heard the contraction "whoever's" used quite often in common speech. Both as a contraction of "whoever is" and also as a possessive pronoun (as in "Whoever's putter's on the green, go back and pick it up.") Seems like an awkward type of use though, when "Whoever left their putter on the green ..." would be grammatically correct, equally clear, but not quite as concise.
Robert said
Glenn said Can I help the next person? or ...sounds much better, engaging, and inviting.
That seems pretty cold, if not sarcastic, like if I call you what I think I'll loose my job
You're seeing something I'm not. I thought Glenn was right. Can you explain further how you see sarcasm?
Sarcasm, that's when you use apparently formal words and logic to express disdain or humor.
To address a bunch of people in front of you as 'person' is very biting and disdainful, or meant to be funny.
A simple test: would you like someone say to you 'That person, please come forward.' Of course not.
'Person' is an impersonal word: A person has got to make a living! For 3rd identity: He's one of the strangest persons. Or when you are totally business: Last person- turn out the lights !
I agree it would be odd to address someone as you suggest. But the use of person is perfectly fine in a multitude of 2nd-person and 1st-person uses without a hint of sarcasm or of impersonal distance.
You are a nice person.
I am a reliable person.
I think the feature of this unique circumstance that allows for the impersonal use of person is that the clerk's statement is not directed solely at the next person individually, but rather to the group of waiting people collectively. It is a group address, even if obliquely so -- Can I help the next person?. If, for example, the clerk were to address the last person in line, it is quite appropriate to say, I am calling the next person in line [and not you.]. Likewise if the next person is distracted it would be perfectly fine for the clerk to say: You, sir, on the phone, you are the next person [in line]. Can I help you? So in addressing the entire assembly of people in line, the use of next person seems fitting.
Impersonal use- that's where the problem is. It's like saying 'I need to stay arm's length with you people, because any otherwise means trouble.' It's very cold.
'You are a nice person' is ok because the 'person' is totally secondary to the adjective. Even then, there is a hint of sarcasm and coldness there. Plenty actually, if you contrast that to 'You are a nice guy/friend.'
Robert said: Impersonal use- that’s where the problem is. It’s like saying ‘I need to stay arm’s length with you people, because any otherwise means trouble.’ It’s very cold.
Indeed, use of the phrase "you people" has gotten more than one person in trouble. Example. Still, as Tromboniator observes, the use of "person" or "people" can be totally neutral -- and appropriate in some contexts. It doesn't bother me either, unless there's some subtle innuendo attached. And that was the case with Perot's remark.
"Can I help who's next" has always bothered me. Thank you for validating my reaction.
I'm with Robert. I hear "Can I [‘control/decide/choose who’ ]s next; or "Am I responsible for the ordination of the queue?" My answer is "No, that is not something you can help; just serve the next customer."
To me it just sounds like bad grammar, asking the wrong question. Those taking offense at other implied meanings are well past what makes this a pet peeve of mine.
torpeau said: It doesn’t sound stilted to me to use may when asking permission, yet people seem to avoid it.
I wouldn't say people "avoid" it. This is one of those areas where usage is evolving, especially in informal speech or writing. In formal use, you'll still see the distinction made between "permission" or "ability." Good blog on that topic here, including a discussion of "can't" vs. "mayn't," the latter being nearly obsolete.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)