No way. You can't use when as a direct contraction or substitute for "what time" when it's the indirect object of a sentence.
Look, I'm all for efficiency in communications. It's a hackish thing to do. But this is just plain silly. If you're so convinced this is a real and usable form of English, call 10 customers or clients and try to use it.
It is a real form of English. If it weren't, I wouldn't have immediately known what it meant. It's prescriptively not very fancy even in dialects where it exists, but it is how people talk.
I think his point (and I'm not attempting to dissect the original phrase in question either) might be rooted in some frustration over a perceived decline of the English language.
It does seem as though we have gotten to the point where common usage of a word or phrase often becomes acceptable as correct usage.
An example: Everyone knows what a person means when he says he's nauseous, even the right word was nauseated. It doesn't mean the dictionary should be changed to accommodate that usage, right? I believe at least one American English dictionary now accepts nauseous as a synonym for nauseated. (Yuck)
To be fair, we got to the point where common usage of a word or phrase often becomes acceptable as correct usage about 50,000 years ago. That's how the English language came about in the first place. If we were strict linguistic prescriptivists from the beginning, we'd still be speaking flawless Ooga Booga.
I agree that some changes make the language less clear and might be ill-advised for that reason, and I also agree that some usages are not appropriate for all crowds, but let's not pretend the English language as it was taught in American schools in the late 20th century is the pinnacle of verbal communication.
Agreed. But lets also agree that given the ever-growing tidal forces of SMS and Twitter that we try to retain some legibility in our language and communications.
For example: Everyone one of you reading this has probably encountered someone using "U" instead of "you" in non-SMS business or technical correspondence. Is that laziness or extreme efficiency? Maybe they're still a Prince fan. Does it even matter to most people anymore?
You don't need to worry about the grammar police. You need to worry about the person with whom you are trying to make an appointment. Saying "let me know when works for you" is about like saying "let me know where you would like to meet at." The former is at best an example of bad style. There is no good reason to intentionally risk making a bad first impression. No one is going to say "I really like this guy's stance against the grammar police. Let's meet with him as soon as possible."
we use it around the office, i've used it with clients, and clients have used it with me. perhaps its regional. on the research i did, it seems to be a brittishism that migrated across some time ago.
Look, I'm all for efficiency in communications. It's a hackish thing to do. But this is just plain silly. If you're so convinced this is a real and usable form of English, call 10 customers or clients and try to use it.