What the heck is the grammar behind the wedding vow "'til death do us part"?

Question

This question has been bugging me for a while.

Assuming the verb "part" is used transitively ("Death parts us"), it should be (taking into account the archaic SOV syntax), "'til death DOES us part". Assuming "part" is used intransitively ("We part"), it should be "'til death do WE part". So what the heck is the logic behind the grammar "'til death do us part"? I can't think of any way for it to be grammatically correct.

Answer 1

I'm a bit surprised that no one has yet corrected the word order. It is NOT "till death do us part" but rather "till death us do part".

Yes, the order is unusual for English, but the original version of the expression, penned by Cranmer for the "Book of Common Prayer" in 1549, imitated the LATIN order, probably because at the time that sort of order was thought to "feel right" for formal, liturgical use. (Note, such services had, before this book, been conducted IN Latin.)

As for the "do" rather than "does" -- that's the SUBJUNCTIVE mood, which in the 16th century was common used in subordinate clauses referring to something to happen at an indefinite time in the future. (Subjunctive mood is not understood by many English speakers, but it is still used for things like wishes and contrary-to-fact statements - "God be with you" and "If I were king of the forest"/"If I were a rich man")

Actually, the ORIGINAL verb was not "do part" but "DEPART" (meaning "separate") --also in th subjunctive mood. But that sense of the word was lost in the 17th century, and substituting "do part" (rather than just "part") was an easy change, keeping the rhythm and feel that was familiar.

(Knowing that it was originally "depart" might also make it easier to remember the correct order "do part".)


For more details see:
http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20001013

Answer 2

Until Death Do We Part

Answer 3

Yeah, it was written back in the OLDE days. There is also the phrase "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". The King James Bible uses this sort of grammar so it must revolve around the grammatical principles of 17th century English.

from Wiki:

The King James Version has traditionally been appreciated for the quality of the prose and poetry in the translation. However, the English language has changed since the time of its publication, and the King James Version employs words and grammatical structures that may be foreign to modern readers. For example, the King James Version uses the second person singular pronouns, such as "thou". Some words used in the King James Version have changed meaning since the translation was made; for example "replenish" is used in the translation in the sense of "fill" where the modern verb means "to refill", and "even" (a word very often introduced by the translators and thus italicized) is mostly used in the sense of "namely" or "that is". Because of this, some modern readers find the King James Version more difficult to understand than more recent translations.

Answer 4

Thank god someone finally pointed out the obvious. Til' death do/does part us IS essentially correct. US is the objective form we use with "part", not WE. Jeez! I think a lot of people try to way overthink the us/we thing.

And furthermore! I think the explanation for this phrase's having come through to modern times as Death DO us part is that it is a sloppy transcription of DOTH. "Til' death doth us part" would be grammatically correct. Someone copied it sloppily.

Answer 5

Nothing, because that s not the vow. It should read til death doth us part .. which means until death separates us . The worth doth is the (now archaic) third person singular indicative form of do ,

Answer 6

Actually, it's an archaic form, such as one would see in the King James Bible or in Shakespeare. We would be more likely to see it in our grammar as ""Til death part us."

"Part" in this case is transitive with "us" being the object.

Answer 7

I think that is what we call poetic, or the way people talked long ago. It was probably gramatically correct at one time.
" til death does us part" would make it gramatically correct now.

Answer 8

It just sounds better than "Tille death do we part", that sounds pretty dumb, no offense. Even though, "Till death do we part" makes total sense, "Till death do us part, sounds a little better. But some person form a long time ago probably came up with it, and you know, most people back then talked kind of funny, no offense to them.
Hope this helps!

Answer 9

it may not be grammatically correct but I'm sure back on the days grammar was not as sophisticated as it is today. Take a look at the KJV Bible and Shakespeare's plays. It is very hard to understand with thou and least withst...

Answer 10

It is Middle English. Turn it around to Modern English and you have:
Until Death parts us