Myself and My colleague will meet with you....

[OnHerSolidFoundations]

FFS please stop using "myself " in emails!

Just remove your colleague's name from the sentence and see how stupid you sound...

"Myself will meet with you"

There see! It's not hard. The word you are looking for is "I"

I WILL MEET WITH YOU

Ffs. You work in communications
🙈🙈🙈

🤣

And you don’t meet with anyone, you just meet them.

If it's how they describe that group, why change it, though? There are a number of crews related to your journey, and this is what they call the crew dealing with your snacks etc.

It's like cabin crew on a plane. We know they're in the cabin, but why shouldn't it be in their group name anyway?

Either is fine in most contexts.

Languages don't evolve toward perfect efficiency. You will often find more than one formally correct way of saying things. This is an example.

There are subtle differences in meaning which native speakers tend to take in their stride.

Do you know George? I met him once on a plane in 1983

Have you discussed the project with George? Yes, I met (with) him yesterday.

Met with has the connotation of a planned discussion. Met notes that you have encountered someone at least once. Both met and met with are used to cover having a meeting, and that can overlap with the other two senses. We don't have to think this out. We learn from listening to other native speakers. We can be thrown off course if we start framing things that aren't familiar to us as broken rules.

So would you put David and I will meet you at 2pm for the meeting

?

It's enraging! And generally used by people who want to make themselves sound important. Nope, you sound pompous and thick.

Exactly what I came on to say. Notwithstanding @unnumber 's interesting point, this is not 'met' in the past, it's something planned for the future so it doesn't need 'with' to indicate that it's about arranging a meeting of some sort.

Great posts by unnumber.

I'm uncomfortable with these threads because, as several PPs have pointed out, this one in particular (the overuse of the reflexive) stems in part from a desire to adhere to a misunderstood 'correctness' and some of the sneering at it is reminiscent, to me, of Betjeman's sneering at the habits of the lower middle classes. Grammar 'pedantry' can quickly evolve into classism, xenophobia, even sectarianism (see threads on 'haitch' passim) and is often, consciously or otherwise, about putting people in their presumed place.

Edit: and of course I made a typo [sodslaw]

'Final station stop' is the one that tips my husband over the edge.

One.

... Singular sensation?

I feel like this is a phenomenon that's gone mad in the last few years. I've mainly heard it from men who seem to be trying to sound more professional? Some examples I've heard lately:
You'll get an email from myself with the quote.
Once yourselves are happy we can proceed, and it'll be myself dealing with it.
Please just ask for myself when you call.

I hate it! It's worse than people using 'I' incorrectly to sound posh.

I have noticed the misuse of 'myself' by receptionists and so on going with a weird pronunciation of 'you', to make it sound more like 'yow'. Has anyone else noticed this? Is it somebody's weird idea of 'business English'?

Probably not, but there are dozens of ways you could phrase that without being incorrect, including what you've written.

@unnumber is right, of course, that languages change all the time and not always in a logical way. As a new season of Masterchef is now under way, John Torode is once again saying 'You've got to impress Gregg and I'. No, John, take Gregg out of that sentence - or, ideally, right out of the programme - and you'd see that's wrong. 'You've got to impress me' is what you would be left with. That's probably a lost cause now.

Two different meanings.
Meet + object = meet for the first time or have a programmed meeting
Meet with= programmed meeting.

I have to disagree with PP, I saw the Michelle from Interior Design Masters ep referred to and she quite clearly said “of”.

It doesn't "need" it, but using it adds clarity. It tells us that I'm having an official meeting rather than meeting my friend in the bar.

Doesn't he understand that sometimes trains go through stations without stopping?

There are stops that aren't stations though, and stations you don't stop at. I suppose there are train lines where everything is very uniform and regular and that's less obvious.

People would understand final stop / final station but no harm in train drivers being precise.

You'll also see people reach for lengtheners when they make or script a public announcement. If they are too concise, people don't tune in or may miss words. Less isn't more on train announcements. Rhythm is helpful. Final station ends on a weak syllable. Final stop is short. Final station stop is easy to say with a firm rhythm and harder to miss.

So when you hear things like "Ladies and Gentlemen, we are just coming into our final station stop at London Paddington; that's London Paddington, where this train will terminate. All passengers must alight at London Paddington please. London Paddington is our final station stop", they are doing their job well.

My husband likes to think he is the most logical man on the planet. He isn't, as I often have occasion to point out. However, in his defence I will say that if a train stops other than at a station, passengers (I refuse to call us customers, decades after the train companies unilaterally renamed us) will not be able to get off the train unless there's been a crash. Hence, 'final stop' or 'final destination' should be enough.

@OnHerSolidFoundations best thread ever, sick of people saying “myself” arrghhh

But those choices aren't clearer than the alternative; arguably less so. They're not more accurate. There's nothing wrong with the original.

Nobody communicates using the least possible information in the least ambiguous terms. Languages do not reach that point. As language users, we make choices in context about the way to speak as naturally and unambiguously as we need to. There will be lots of options of equal use and accuracy.

Picking holes in people's choices will always be possible for people who see themselves as logical, but humans don't speak in programming languages - not even the most tormented grammarians. So these criticisms just make people doubtful and defensive and stop them from using the skills they've got to communicate sensibly.

(Though I am sure you and your husband don't offer direct feedback to the driver / train manager!)

It is just quite an interesting phenomenon to see how much language change is driven by anxiety about getting it wrong - the I, me, myself business. If people were more relaxed about language usage, some changes would probably never have spread so widely.

Thank you so much for this post. I think we need a national campaign to deal with this because it genuinely drives me crazy! I wish we could correct people without offending them.

Oh I remember this in traitors, one evening during the round table bit everyone was at it with the "myself" "yourself" etc.. I don't know how I kept watching to be honest!