Per your recent comment about how grammar, spelling, and semantics are so important and based. The word me is improper in the above sentence. It should read: I and some friends check this site. Think about it. I check this site...not... Me check this site.
Sorry to be cranky, but there are bigger things to worry about right now. Isn't there something about not throwing stones in the bible.
Yes, it's grammatical (at least in terms of native spoken English) to say 'me and my friends' even in nominative position, but it's a disfavored construction because most people regard it as sounding uneducated.
The grammatical rule involved is that a conjoined pronoun phrase requires accusative form whether or not it's an object: Me and my friends are going out. They threw me and my friends out of the movie. It is actually quite similar to a construction found in French: Moi et mes amis, [nous] sortons en la ville. In English, it's only found in pronoun phrases where there is at least one pronoun and a conjunction and or or, although a singular pronoun might be repeated in accusative form to topicalize or emphasize it. Me, I like wine. But never just *Me like wine (unless you are Cookie Monster).
Back in about the 17th century, when Latin was the language of learning, there were several English grammarians who felt English grammar could be "improved" by making it more like Latin, and this accusative-as-subject thing bothered them. 'I and my friends' would be better, or better yet, 'my friends and I' (so as not to put oneself first impolitely). 'My friends and me' would still be okay in the accusative position. This all followed the same kind of rules used in Latin: Amici eimus et ego; amicos et me de theatro eiexerunt. And this rule has been pounded into English (and American) schoolchildren's heads ever since. As a result, the native form has come to be viewed as uneducated-sounding.
The problem with it, though, is that it's not naturally part of the language. The way we can conclude this is because we'll observe something called hypercorrection. Many or even most people will say things like They told Jeff and I to talk this way. The Latin-inspired seventeenth-century grammarians would recoil in horror at this (and it actually annoys me, too, but not just because it's "wrong"), but most modern English speakers often don't even notice it at the same time as they complain about the uneducated sound of 'me and my friends' (and that's why it annoys me), but it's evidence that the special rule for conjoined pronoun phrases wasn't really eliminated by the prescriptive grammar, which says the pronouns should follow logical case rather than natural syntax.
What hypercorrection is is when a speaker attempts to translate or transform a word without appreciating a distinction, and thus corrects something that should not have been corrected. In this case, the me and Jeff is 'translated' as Jeff and I but really it is (according to the prescriptivists) either Jeff and I and Jeff and me depending on the context. Another example of hypercorrection can be found in people trying to sound British who mispronounce the u vowel. Most British dialects and few American ones have a distinction between 'long u' as |uw| as in noon or |juw| as in tune. Actors with bad British accents may mispronounce noon as |njuwn| because they failed to internalize the distinction, just as the 'They told Jeff and I' speakers have failed to internalize the distinction in the prescriptive grammar.
Anyhow, saying 'My friends and I did something' has greater social prestige most of the time, although it's not linguistically 'better'.
NUMBER 2
Who said anything about ill will being the reason behind correcting mistakes? People who get offended when their mistakes get pointed out are insecure losers. I point out others' mistakes to help them, so that they may not make the same mistake the next time. And I assume others are trying to help, not offend me, when they do the same. If that's not the default way of thinking for you then your life must be sad and paranoid.
NUMBER 3
I can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time, just like how I can correct mistakes and fight the deep state at the same time (well, my power is sadly limited to posting and commenting on TD.win and other sites, as well as archiving evidence).
NUMBER 4
Also, I mentioned "like the Bible" as a phrase, such as "avoid like the plague". I actually don't give a damn about half of what it says. It bans eating shrimp for example. I've never eaten shrimp but I'm not gonna be banned from eating it in the future just because some dusty old book says so.
Haha, you proved my point. What you wrote was ungrammatical, period. I don't give a shit, but my correcting you certainly got your panties in a wad and that's the effect it can have on people - get it now? You're the one who brought up the Bible and now you're dissing it? I'm a Buddhist, so whatever.
This whole argument is stupid, but I am getting very cranky about the election fraud, and for that reason I apologize for wasting your time (and mine). MAGA.
What? You're the only one who has beef and contacted me about a different comment, why are you acting like I have anything to do with your pet peeves?
I copied that big block of text from a quora thread, it took me 5 seconds.
I didn't bring up the Bible literally, it was a phrase. And I am grateful when someone corrects my mistakes, and so should be everybody including you.
You might be annoyed by what you started, but don't project your quick temper on me, I'm a happy warrior and a winner and the only thing I feel right now is a slight puzzlement by what you wrote.
WHY IS HUNGARY NOT GREEN
Me and some friends check this site like the Bible!!
Per your recent comment about how grammar, spelling, and semantics are so important and based. The word me is improper in the above sentence. It should read: I and some friends check this site. Think about it. I check this site...not... Me check this site.
Sorry to be cranky, but there are bigger things to worry about right now. Isn't there something about not throwing stones in the bible.
An expert's opinion:
Yes, it's grammatical (at least in terms of native spoken English) to say 'me and my friends' even in nominative position, but it's a disfavored construction because most people regard it as sounding uneducated.
The grammatical rule involved is that a conjoined pronoun phrase requires accusative form whether or not it's an object: Me and my friends are going out. They threw me and my friends out of the movie. It is actually quite similar to a construction found in French: Moi et mes amis, [nous] sortons en la ville. In English, it's only found in pronoun phrases where there is at least one pronoun and a conjunction and or or, although a singular pronoun might be repeated in accusative form to topicalize or emphasize it. Me, I like wine. But never just *Me like wine (unless you are Cookie Monster).
Back in about the 17th century, when Latin was the language of learning, there were several English grammarians who felt English grammar could be "improved" by making it more like Latin, and this accusative-as-subject thing bothered them. 'I and my friends' would be better, or better yet, 'my friends and I' (so as not to put oneself first impolitely). 'My friends and me' would still be okay in the accusative position. This all followed the same kind of rules used in Latin: Amici eimus et ego; amicos et me de theatro eiexerunt. And this rule has been pounded into English (and American) schoolchildren's heads ever since. As a result, the native form has come to be viewed as uneducated-sounding.
The problem with it, though, is that it's not naturally part of the language. The way we can conclude this is because we'll observe something called hypercorrection. Many or even most people will say things like They told Jeff and I to talk this way. The Latin-inspired seventeenth-century grammarians would recoil in horror at this (and it actually annoys me, too, but not just because it's "wrong"), but most modern English speakers often don't even notice it at the same time as they complain about the uneducated sound of 'me and my friends' (and that's why it annoys me), but it's evidence that the special rule for conjoined pronoun phrases wasn't really eliminated by the prescriptive grammar, which says the pronouns should follow logical case rather than natural syntax.
What hypercorrection is is when a speaker attempts to translate or transform a word without appreciating a distinction, and thus corrects something that should not have been corrected. In this case, the me and Jeff is 'translated' as Jeff and I but really it is (according to the prescriptivists) either Jeff and I and Jeff and me depending on the context. Another example of hypercorrection can be found in people trying to sound British who mispronounce the u vowel. Most British dialects and few American ones have a distinction between 'long u' as |uw| as in noon or |juw| as in tune. Actors with bad British accents may mispronounce noon as |njuwn| because they failed to internalize the distinction, just as the 'They told Jeff and I' speakers have failed to internalize the distinction in the prescriptive grammar.
Anyhow, saying 'My friends and I did something' has greater social prestige most of the time, although it's not linguistically 'better'.
Who said anything about ill will being the reason behind correcting mistakes? People who get offended when their mistakes get pointed out are insecure losers. I point out others' mistakes to help them, so that they may not make the same mistake the next time. And I assume others are trying to help, not offend me, when they do the same. If that's not the default way of thinking for you then your life must be sad and paranoid.
I can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time, just like how I can correct mistakes and fight the deep state at the same time (well, my power is sadly limited to posting and commenting on TD.win and other sites, as well as archiving evidence).
Also, I mentioned "like the Bible" as a phrase, such as "avoid like the plague". I actually don't give a damn about half of what it says. It bans eating shrimp for example. I've never eaten shrimp but I'm not gonna be banned from eating it in the future just because some dusty old book says so.
Have a good day
Haha, you proved my point. What you wrote was ungrammatical, period. I don't give a shit, but my correcting you certainly got your panties in a wad and that's the effect it can have on people - get it now? You're the one who brought up the Bible and now you're dissing it? I'm a Buddhist, so whatever.
This whole argument is stupid, but I am getting very cranky about the election fraud, and for that reason I apologize for wasting your time (and mine). MAGA.
What? You're the only one who has beef and contacted me about a different comment, why are you acting like I have anything to do with your pet peeves?
I copied that big block of text from a quora thread, it took me 5 seconds.
I didn't bring up the Bible literally, it was a phrase. And I am grateful when someone corrects my mistakes, and so should be everybody including you.
You might be annoyed by what you started, but don't project your quick temper on me, I'm a happy warrior and a winner and the only thing I feel right now is a slight puzzlement by what you wrote.
MAGA, I guess?