Alia's wholly surreal contribution to the discussion includes a relative clause introduced by 'that': THE GREAT MAN THAT WAS ABLE TO BRING BACK MY LOVER ... We should have "the great man who was able ..." just as we have "CONTACT THIS GREAT MAN WHOSE NAME ,,," rather than "this great man that's name ...". Perhaps less importance is attached to such niceties across the Atlantic in places such as the USA, or Haiti. I'm just saying.

In South African English "hey" is used to emphasise a question mark, as in "Is you ous (translation 'guys') cummin (coming), hey?" The connection between these fine people and Navajo Indians is perhaps a bit of a tenuous one, hey?

Truthwhisperer|:

Q: What do you call a person who asks "what do you call a person that asks..."?
A: An American.
Q: Is the relative pronoun 'who/whom/whose' redundant over on that side of the Atlantic?
A: Yup/Yep/Yuh/Ja. Seems so.
Q: Why?

Warsaw Will: I like your answer. I still think that if you are going to use one accent on a word which has two you had might as well use them both. Idle to show you can, then don't. Once you have cracked the keyboard code to insert the accent, use it, I say.
How do you make a circumflex? I can't do melee until I find out.

Warsaw Will,

you type in exceptionally grumpy tones today, wondering why other folk are so daft.

American dictionaries seem to follow the principle that they must be descriptive, allowing for the solecisms which have wormed their way into 'accepted' American English. English dictionaries, I think, try to be prescriptive, allowing only what has been argued or reasoned to be the 'correct' form. Long-standing errors such as aqueduct which of course should be aquaduct from Latin aqua-ducere, but isn't because it has always been aqueduct, but moving on ...,

the verb resume without accents (meaning to pick up again and continue or start again where you left off) and the noun résumé with accents (meaning a summary of anything, rather than being confined to the meaning attached to curriculum vitae) are the only ones in my English dictionary. No half-baked compromises mentioned. Melee does not need any accents it seems, rather oddly, but if you use one you have to use them both. No half measures here either. Résumé with one accent in and one left out is lazy and half-baked, ill thought through, a mess which is neither one thing nor the other, and even if American dictionaries accept this freak word that is not a sound reason to follow suit.

French is taught in schools in Britain, so the English (and Welsh and Irish and Scottish) know about French accents. That is how many people know about them, since you wonder. When we use French words in English we try use them properly, I am sure, fiancé and fiancée respectively and appropriately for example. You see linguistic horrors in the newspaper every day, but you don't put them in the dictionary. I saw "a peel of laughter" mentioned in yesterday's Daily Telegraph, for example.

I am sure that I would like when writing about perestroika and glasnost and suchlike I would use the Cyrillic alphabet to write these terms if I could remember how to get it on my keyboard. Now that would really be daft.

No, it is résumé. This is because it is French, borrowed by English. Pronounced roughly like ray-zoo-may. Acute accents as provided in the French dictionaries. It means a summary, the past participle of résumer which means "to summarise".
There is another word altogether in English, resume, to pick up once more where you left off. Pronounced ree-zume or rizume according to which dialect you favour. But the meaning is the issue under discussion. The discussion has gone on for nine years, and the answers require no more than a glance in a French and another in an English dictionary.
rem acu tetigi, surely?

- C'est vous?
- Oui, c'est moi.
So, the French have a word for it: moi. It means me in short phrases, such as prepositional phrases ( avec moi, chez moi ...). They say it is a disjunctive pronoun. Well, they say that in French, of course, but the point is that we too have 'me' as a disjunctive pronoun. This is why "It's me" doesn't hurt when you hear it the way "She asked Bob and I to supper", etc., hurts, or "She's coming with Lucy and I".
If in doubt use me, if you are rebuked or sense that you are thought remiss for using it just say you are using it disjunctively and not to be such a pedant.

I have to point out, Thad B, that café's doesn´t have an apostrophe. To make a plural you add an s. Apostrophe denotes possession, or a letter left out. Doesn´t it? (Does not it, leaving out the o and contracting what is left together). And of course cafés has an acute accent, as the French word being used here has one. I can´t cope with Starbucks because the cups defeat me, containing about a litre of coffee in a giant saucer with a minuscule handle, so it´s all over the table and the floor and my knees before I can get to taste it. Ridiculous! I don´t go there any more. There is one in Bangkok in Convent Street next to Molly Malone´s. I go to Molly´s instead. See the apostrophe denoting possession (she has the bar). Lots of accents there: Thai, Irish, English, Japanese ...
I am currently in Spain where there is a plethora of funny punctuation, especially the upside down ¿ before a question.

WW: 'I am me' sounds wrong because the subject and complement are the same person, so the reflexive form "I am myself", (you are yourself ... he is himself ...) are required.

I must add that the disjunctive pronoun 'me .. us' is used as the complement of the verb 'be' and the Scottish examples I gave above demonstrate some examples of 'myself .. yourselves' employed in place of 'me .. you'. This does not mean that you can use it as the subject of 'be': you cannot say "Myself 'll be waiting for ye" or "Yourselves will be wantin' in, then?" for example.

My mother did hear some Glaswegian girls in the Second World War making this suggestion to some Polish soldiers:

"If youse yins'll teach us yins Polish us yins'll teach youse yins English".

So here is an example of "us" used as the subject. But despite what they said it isn't really standard English, is it now?

Glad to make a Polish connection there, Warsaw Will.

It is us, P.

'Us' is the disjunctive form of the first person plural personal pronoun (I, me singular, we, us plural) for use as the complement (after verb to be, so: I am me) and prepositions (with me, with us, etc).
There is a very ugly trend today to use the reflexive form 'myself' in place of the straightforward "I, me". So (heard on phone): "Myself and Sarah 'll see you at the pub" leading I suppose to - "Myself am at the pub now, Sarah is late".
Just stick to disjunctive and you won't go wrong.

In Scotland you are greeted with "Oh! It's yourself! You'll have had your tea." So regional variations, rich in colour and tone, entertain us too. Your A and B people had better have had their tea too, before visiting C, if he is a Scot, and who will say in a suspicious tone "It's yourselves, then!" and they must say "Aye, it's ourselves, aye, but we could do with a wee dram".