"me".
Today's drive 1400Peter laid this down on his screen : 2 seconds is a long time. That should allow you much more than ample...
Not really. I just don't think that argument addresses the issue. Which is that I don't see how the following statement can exclude the the writer from the collective 'us', or 'some of us'. If excluded they could no longer refer to us, as by definition they would no longer be included in the 'us' group of people. Even Harry accepts that now in an earlier post this evening, so why Ian picked me up on it, supported by Harry, when I first wrote it is beyond me. The statement is ambiguous though, but not in the sense of including or excluding the writer, only in it's interpretation.
"We practise the skills and some of us can become as good or sometimes even better than the professionals at the tasks."
To answer your question though, I think you're complicating something that's fairly uncomplicated in fact. 'Some of us are male' or '4 of us are male' makes a qualifying statement by the use of gender and, or number. 'Some of us' on it's own makes no such qualification. By default the collective 'us' or 'some of us', always includes the speaker-writer as I said earlier in this post. I'm no expert on semantics but the distinction seems clear enough to me. Mike.
