Is it bad grammar to use a preposition end your sentence with?

English teachers can be wrong. For example, they may have told you to never split an infinitive or start a sentence with "because." Because most English teachers are not professional writers, many adhere to writing rules without understanding the underlying concepts of those rules. Another rule they may have told you is never to end a sentence with a preposition. This is a rule we agree with--to a point.

Here's why we basically agree: Prepositions typically BEGIN prepositional phrases, and, therefore, require an object of the preposition. [An example of a prepositional phrase is "off the street." The object of the preposition "off" is "street." To find the object, ask, "Off what?" The answer, "street," is the object.] A prepositional phrase cannot be completed if the preposition is the last word in the sentence.

However, sometimes those words that look like prepositions are used as part of a verb, in which case we have no problem putting them at the end of the sentence.

Here are a couple of examples to illustrate what we mean.

1. "She's the girl I want to get away from." "From" is being used as a preposition, but what is the object of the preposition? It's "the girl." This sentence could easily be revised to read, "She's the girl from whom I want to get away." A better revision might be "I want to get away from her." Notice that the second revision is more direct and, happily, has an object to the preposition "from." The second revision, though, emphasizes me and not the girl, so the first may still be the best revision to maintain the intent of the original sentence.

2. "She's the girl from whom I want to get away." "Away" seems like a preposition, but it is being used as part of the verb "get away," which is different than the action of getting. [Actually, in this case, "away" is being used as an adverb, but, for all practical purposes, it's acting like part of the verb.] "Get away" refers to a particular type of action, so we're fine with leaving "away" at the end of the sentence. This is like "I looked his phone number up." "Looked up" refers to a particular action and, though divided, is acting like a single verb.

Ultimately, you have to determine the appropriate level of formality in which you need to write. If the writing is casual, put those prepositions at the end. If the writing is meant to be formal and professional, then consider those ending prepositions very carefully and think about effective revisions. They might not be something you can live with.

Two more examples:

1. This is a rule we agree with.

This is a rule with which we agree. (emphasizing the rule)

We agree with this rule. (emphasizing us, the preposition "with" has an object: "rule.")

2. They might not be something you can live with.

They might not be something with which you can live. (emphasizing they)

You might not be able to live with them. (emphasizing you, the preposition "with" has the object "them.")

Not necessarily............

Contrary to popular belief and despite what your English teachers may have told you, there is no hard and fast grammar rule that states a sentence must not end with a preposition. It is unfortunate that misinformed English teachers reinforce this 'rule' with their students. I suspect this has much more to do with what their mothers told them rather than what their textbooks DON’T tell them.

If there is an informal rule, it is this: Ending a sentence with a preposition is permissible, especially if the sentence looks and sounds good. If the sentence sounds and/or looks awkward with a prepositional ending, try eliminating the prepositional ending by transposing the words/phrases in the sentence, using different verbiage or simply deleting the preposition at the end of the sentence, if possible, as noted in the following example.

EXAMPLE:

Where is it at?

The preposition 'at' should be deleted as it is redundant since 'where' means 'in which place' or 'at what location.' In other words, 'at' is already covered by 'where.' The sentence should read:

Where is it?

Although the quotation (and various forms thereof) attributed to Winston Churchill is apocryphal, i.e., no proof that he ever said it, it makes a valid point in a humorous vein:

“Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.”

Novelist Kingsley Amis was a bit harsher, calling the rule "one of those fancied prohibitions dear to ignorant slobs."

“The myth that ending a sentence with a preposition is wrong appears to have started with an influential book by an eighteenth-century Bishop of London, Robert Lowth, according to Bill Bryson's The Penguin Dictionary of Troublesome Words. In Lowth's Short Introduction to English Grammar, the "gentleman grammarian" urged his readers to be polite by avoiding prepositions at the end of their sentences if they possibly could. To Lowth, for example, writing "this is something you should go to" was less appealing than "this is something to which you should go." "Too many people took him too literally and for a century and a half the notion held sway," Bryson says. "Today, happily, it is universally condemned as a ridiculous affectation."

No, no and no. It's one of the classic prescriptive grammar myths that has been repeatedly debunked in current books about grammar and usage.

See the link, which quotes Professor Geoffey Pullum, co-author of the new Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (probably *the* authority on current US and UK English).

"Myth: It's wrong to end a sentence with a preposition.

Pullum responds: Sure, if you're talking about classical Latin or standard French. But if we are talking about languages like modern English, then prepositions at ends of clauses have been normal for a thousand years."

Generally yes, but I am not sure exactly why. Perhaps using a preposition at the end of a sentence leaves room for the omission of an object of the preposition or because it has potential to be confusing. Sometimes it is unavoidable, however, and seems to be more accepted in the academic community than it used to be.

It's a prescriptive rule of a grammar. What that means is that somebody decided to declare it as bad grammar, and for whatever reason, people followed. Because this rule is so ingrained in what is considered "correct" English, it's best to avoid the rule in very formal settings like school papers or research papers. However, there is nothing inherently wrong with it, and it is perfectly acceptable to use in conversation, in informal papers (like stories or timed essays), or in formal papers when there is no clearer way to write what you want to say.

Technically, yes, it's bad grammar, but it is sometimes idiomatically natural, as answerer #3 said. Don't let anyone slam you for it.

Funny, true story about that --

The mother was eagerly teaching her kindergarten-aged son about math and English and other subjects so he'd be a step ahead of the rest. They had been reading from a book the boy found laborious and uninteresting. One night before bed, as she brought the book upstairs, he said: "Aw, Mom! What are you bringing that book I don't want to be read to out of up for?"

Because there's is always a better way to structure a sentence to read smoother than to allow prepositions to dangle from the end of it.

This question was famously addressed by the comparison of "That is something that I will not put up with," and "That is something up with which I will not put." Grammatical rules pale beside the ridiculous pomposity of grammatical correctness. Reword grammatically if you can. Say what comes naturally if you can't.

Generally it avoids clumsiness and dangling small words,but as an absolute rule it was dreamed up by Victorian old biddies. Churchill neatly harpooned it by retorting,"Sir, that is something up with which I will not put."