I was teaching in Canada last week, and I came up against an issue that has also surfaced in U.S. business writing seminars. It has to do with that supremely formal "undersigned" person who appears at the end of letters in statements like these:
- If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
- If you have any questions about the above-mentioned, please contact the undersigned.
I argued politely with my Canadian writing class participants that "the undersigned" could be simply stated as "me":
- If you need any additional information, please contact me.
- If you have any questions about this information, please contact me.
They were not so sure. They felt that using "the undersigned" communicated an important degree of formality. They also believed the third-person "undersigned" indicated that they were writing for the company in a way that the word "me" did not. They suggested that even with their company name in all capital letters and their title beneath the complimentary close, "me" could suggest personal liability.
Not being a lawyer, I argued only on ground where I felt safe: in support of conciseness, clarity, and warm business relationships. On those issues, we agreed.
But today I call a witness: lawyer and lexicographer Bryan Garner, editor of Garner's Modern American Usage. About "the undersigned" Garner writes in that book, "Even in law it's a silly way of avoiding the first person."
Yes, my Canadian friends–I admit my source is Garner's Modern American Usage. But unless you can find a Canadian expert who defends "the undersigned" as necessary and meaningful, I invite you to join in using "me."
Any questions or comments? Please write to
the undersigned me.