The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

[split] Y'all

_J__J_ PedantRegistered User, __BANNED USERS regular
edited June 2007 in Debate and/or Discourse
Y'all is a contraction of "you" and "all", which is the second person plural in english. Some feel that the second person plural in english does not exist or, rather, the form of the second person plural is something other than "ya'll" or "y'all".

Discuss.




Outside sources:
-pronoun
You-all
Glaeal wrote: »
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/you-all
You-all functions with perfect grammatical regularity as a second person plural pronoun, taking its own possessive you-all's (or less frequently, your-all's, where both parts of the word are inflected for possession): You-all's voices sound alike. Southerners do not, as is sometimes believed, use you-all or y'all for both singular and plural you. A single person may only be addressed as you-all if the speaker implies in the reference other persons not present: Did you-all [you and others] have dinner yet? You and you-all preserve the singular/plural distinction that English used to have in thou and ye, the subject forms of singular and plural you, respectively (thee and you were the singular and plural object forms). The distinction between singular thou/thee and plural ye/you began to blur as early as the 13th century, when the plural form was often used for the singular in formal contexts or to indicate politeness, much as the French use tu for singular and familiar "you," and vous for both plural and polite singular "you." In English, the object form you gradually came to be used in subject position as well, so that the four forms thou, thee, ye, and you collapsed into one form, you. Thou and thee were quite rare in educated speech in the 16th century, and they disappeared completely from standard English in the 18th. However, the distinction between singular and plural you is just as useful as that between other singular and plural pronoun forms, such as I and we. In addition to y'all, other forms for plural you include you-uns, youse, and you guys or youse guys. Youse is common in vernacular varieties in the Northeast, particularly in large cities such as New York and Boston, and is also common in Irish English.
James wrote: »
Also, here is a list of english personal pronouns, from wikipedia:

* I (1st. person singular)
* Thou (2nd. person singular, archaic)
* You (2nd. person singular/plural)
* He (3rd. person singular, masculine)
* She (3rd. person singular, feminine)
* It (3rd. person singular, neuter)
* One (morphologically 3rd. person singular, though semantically equivalent to "we")
* We (1st. person plural)
* Y'all (2nd. person plural, dialectal)
* Ye (2nd. person plural, archaic)
* They (3rd. person plural)

_J_ on
«134

Posts

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    "Y'all" is not a word. You cannot contract random words.

    Thread over.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    "Y'all" is not a word. You cannot contract random words.

    Thread over.

    "y'all" is a word. "You" and "all" (the components of the second person plural) are not random words.

    Thread continues.

    _J_ on
  • GlaealGlaeal Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    yall are crazy

    Glaeal on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    That is not how the word is used. "Y'all" is used both in a singular and plural, and only in certain regions of the country, which are world-reknowned for their lack of education. "You all" is not the second-person plural. You are making shit up, and trying to call it a language. "You all" isn't even a grammatically correct structure.

    Thanatos on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The second person plural is not "you all". The second person plural is "you". "You all" is the second person plural followed by the word "all".

    And there are rules on how you can contract words. You cannot pick any two random words and contract them. You and all cannot be contracted. "Y'all" is not a real word.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I thought that in English, the second person plural is 'you'.

    'All' has nothing to do with it. Y'all may be valid as a qualifier, but that's all it is.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Thanatos wrote: »
    That is not how the word is used. "Y'all" is used both in a singular and plural, and only in certain regions of the country, which are world-reknowned for their lack of education.

    To use "ya'll" as the second person singular is to use a word incorrectly.

    An instance of a person using a word incorrectly does not mean that the word itself is incorrect.

    If a child refers to a cat as a "dog" this is not indicative of some fault of the word "dog".

    _J_ on
  • GlaealGlaeal Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Is it in the dictionary?

    Glaeal on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    The second person plural is not "you all".

    That is an incorrect statement.

    _J_ on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    To use "ya'll" as the second person singular is to use a word incorrectly.
    To use "ya'll" at all is to use a word incorrectly. Because "ya'll" is not a word.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Glaeal wrote: »
    Is it in the dictionary?

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/y'all

    _J_ on
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    The second person plural is not "you all". The second person plural is "you". "You all" is the second person plural followed by the word "all".

    And there are rules on how you can contract words. You cannot pick any two random words and contract them. You and all cannot be contracted. "Y'all" is not a real word.

    I'm not going to argue it's not real--it's real enough for the purposes of this.

    However, it's totally unnecessary.

    We don't use 'ye' any more, only 'you'. It is used for both forms, unlike other languages that make the distinction (tu v. su, tous v. vous, so on).

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    To use "ya'll" as the second person singular is to use a word incorrectly.
    To use "ya'll" at all is to use a word incorrectly. Because "ya'll" is not a word.

    It is a word because it both appears in the dictionary (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/y'all) and is a sensible contraction of two words "you" and "all" which are the words used to form the second person plural in english.

    _J_ on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    The second person plural is not "you all".

    That is an incorrect statement.
    You calling it an incorrect statement doesn't make it an incorrect statement. The grammar rules of the English language have priority on your opinion, and they say I am right and you are wrong.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • GlaealGlaeal Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    So if it's in common usage, and it's in the dictionary, how is it not a word?

    Glaeal on
  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Jesus Christ.

    Whatever words native english speakers use - those are correct English.

    Shinto on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    That is not how the word is used. "Y'all" is used both in a singular and plural, and only in certain regions of the country, which are world-reknowned for their lack of education.
    To use "ya'll" as the second person singular is to use a word incorrectly.

    An instance of a person using a word incorrectly does not mean that the word itself is incorrect.

    If a child refers to a cat as a "dog" this is not indicative of some fault of the word "dog".
    If everyone who uses it uses it like that, though, with only a few exceptions, then I'd say a cat is, indeed, a dog, at least by your logic.

    Thanatos on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am

    _J_ on
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Shinto wrote: »
    Jesus Christ.

    Whatever words native english speakers use - those are correct English.

    Shinto!

    India needs you.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    The grammar rules of the English language have priority on your opinion, and they say I am right and you are wrong.

    Citation?

    _J_ on
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am

    I'll be damned if anyone would actually try to use that argument. We've better reasons to complain.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    Shinto wrote: »
    Jesus Christ.

    Whatever words native english speakers use - those are correct English.

    Shinto!

    India needs you.

    The other players in the civ game need to form their own parties and policies for a while.

    It was getting kind of weird there. Little too much Shinto love.

    Shinto on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am
    I haven't seen anyone make that argument.

    I have seen people make the argument that it's not a contraction because you don't have the right to pick any two words that take your fancy and contract them. And they're right.

    Now quit picking random words, contracting them, and pretending it's a real word.

    Or if you prefer:

    No'it pick'dom words, cont'em, an'tending it's a re'rd.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am

    I'll be damned if anyone would actually try to use that argument. We've better reasons to complain.

    You are correct.

    See? I used "you" because I was using the second person singular.

    _J_ on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am
    I haven't seen anyone make that argument.

    I have seen people make the argument that it's not a contraction because you don't have the right to pick any two words that take your fancy and contract them. And they're right.

    Now quit picking random words, contracting them, and pretending it's a real word.

    Or if you prefer:

    No'it pick'dom words, cont'em, an'tending it's a re'rd.

    It's not two random words!

    It's the two words which form the second person plural in english.

    _J_ on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    The grammar rules of the English language have priority on your opinion, and they say I am right and you are wrong.

    Citation?
    Every single English grammar book ever written.

    Fuck, you're the one making the claim. Show me a grammar book that says picking random words and contracting them for fun (not to mention alternating the spelling from y'all to ya'll every five uses) is a valid grammar rule.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • MrMisterMrMister Jesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Y'all is a part of certain dialects of English. I'm at a loss for what more could be said about it.

    MrMister on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    It's not two random words!

    It's the two words which form the second person plural in english.
    Stop saying that and get it through your head already: the second person plural in English is YOU.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am
    I haven't seen anyone make that argument.

    I have seen people make the argument that it's not a contraction because you don't have the right to pick any two words that take your fancy and contract them. And they're right.

    Now quit picking random words, contracting them, and pretending it's a real word.

    Or if you prefer:

    No'it pick'dom words, cont'em, an'tending it's a re'rd.

    It's not two random words!

    It's the two words which form the second person plural in english.

    No.

    'You' is the second person plural in English.

    'You all' is just a qualifier of something that is already the second person plural based on context, because people don't want to say 'ye'.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    Stop saying that and get it through your head already: the second person plural in English is YOU ALL.

    Fixed.

    _J_ on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am
    I haven't seen anyone make that argument.

    I have seen people make the argument that it's not a contraction because you don't have the right to pick any two words that take your fancy and contract them. And they're right.

    Now quit picking random words, contracting them, and pretending it's a real word.

    Or if you prefer:

    No'it pick'dom words, cont'em, an'tending it's a re'rd.

    It's not two random words!

    It's the two words which form the second person plural in english.

    No.

    'You' is the second person plural in English.

    'You all' is just a qualifier of something that is already the second person plural based on context, because people don't want to say 'ye'.

    "You all" is the second person plural in english because "you" is the second person singular.

    _J_ on
  • GlaealGlaeal Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/you-all
    You-all functions with perfect grammatical regularity as a second person plural pronoun, taking its own possessive you-all's (or less frequently, your-all's, where both parts of the word are inflected for possession): You-all's voices sound alike. Southerners do not, as is sometimes believed, use you-all or y'all for both singular and plural you. A single person may only be addressed as you-all if the speaker implies in the reference other persons not present: Did you-all [you and others] have dinner yet? You and you-all preserve the singular/plural distinction that English used to have in thou and ye, the subject forms of singular and plural you, respectively (thee and you were the singular and plural object forms). The distinction between singular thou/thee and plural ye/you began to blur as early as the 13th century, when the plural form was often used for the singular in formal contexts or to indicate politeness, much as the French use tu for singular and familiar "you," and vous for both plural and polite singular "you." In English, the object form you gradually came to be used in subject position as well, so that the four forms thou, thee, ye, and you collapsed into one form, you. Thou and thee were quite rare in educated speech in the 16th century, and they disappeared completely from standard English in the 18th. However, the distinction between singular and plural you is just as useful as that between other singular and plural pronoun forms, such as I and we. In addition to y'all, other forms for plural you include you-uns, youse, and you guys or youse guys. Youse is common in vernacular varieties in the Northeast, particularly in large cities such as New York and Boston, and is also common in Irish English.

    Glaeal on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    "You all" is the second person plural in english because "you" is the second person singular.
    You is both the second person singular and the second person plural. It can be both. And it is both. And the fact you can't understand that doesn't affect English grammar.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • JamesJames Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Okay, repost!
    James wrote: »
    Also, here is a list of english personal pronouns, from wikipedia:

    * I (1st. person singular)
    * Thou (2nd. person singular, archaic)
    * You (2nd. person singular/plural)
    * He (3rd. person singular, masculine)
    * She (3rd. person singular, feminine)
    * It (3rd. person singular, neuter)
    * One (morphologically 3rd. person singular, though semantically equivalent to "we")
    * We (1st. person plural)
    * Y'all (2nd. person plural, dialectal)
    * Ye (2nd. person plural, archaic)
    * They (3rd. person plural)

    James on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Glaeal wrote: »
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/you-all

    You-all functions with perfect grammatical regularity as a second person plural pronoun, taking its own possessive you-all's (or less frequently, your-all's, where both parts of the word are inflected for possession): You-all's voices sound alike. Southerners do not, as is sometimes believed, use you-all or y'all for both singular and plural you. A single person may only be addressed as you-all if the speaker implies in the reference other persons not present: Did you-all [you and others] have dinner yet? You and you-all preserve the singular/plural distinction that English used to have in thou and ye, the subject forms of singular and plural you, respectively (thee and you were the singular and plural object forms). The distinction between singular thou/thee and plural ye/you began to blur as early as the 13th century, when the plural form was often used for the singular in formal contexts or to indicate politeness, much as the French use tu for singular and familiar "you," and vous for both plural and polite singular "you." In English, the object form you gradually came to be used in subject position as well, so that the four forms thou, thee, ye, and you collapsed into one form, you. Thou and thee were quite rare in educated speech in the 16th century, and they disappeared completely from standard English in the 18th. However, the distinction between singular and plural you is just as useful as that between other singular and plural pronoun forms, such as I and we. In addition to y'all, other forms for plural you include you-uns, youse, and you guys or youse guys. Youse is common in vernacular varieties in the Northeast, particularly in large cities such as New York and Boston, and is also common in Irish English.

    _J_ on
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    For those who would argue that is is not a contraction because contractions have only one letter after the apostrophe: ma'am
    I haven't seen anyone make that argument.

    I have seen people make the argument that it's not a contraction because you don't have the right to pick any two words that take your fancy and contract them. And they're right.

    Now quit picking random words, contracting them, and pretending it's a real word.

    Or if you prefer:

    No'it pick'dom words, cont'em, an'tending it's a re'rd.

    It's not two random words!

    It's the two words which form the second person plural in english.

    No.

    'You' is the second person plural in English.

    'You all' is just a qualifier of something that is already the second person plural based on context, because people don't want to say 'ye'.

    "You all" is the second person plural in english because "you" is the second person singular.

    ...um, no.

    I know that, historically, you get your kicks to dirty Conjunction Junction fanmovies, but you don't get to make pronouns up just because you say so. 'You all' is a qualified version of 'you' that emphasizes second person. The all is absolutely unnecessary; 'you' is sufficient to denote either second person singular or plural. That's why everyone else outside of the South, including England (who has a say in this), uses 'you' only.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    MrMister wrote: »
    Y'all is a part of certain dialects of English. I'm at a loss for what more could be said about it.
    Indeed. To claim it's the second-person plural in English is fucking retarded, because that's not how it's used at all.

    Thanatos on
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    "You all" is the second person plural in english because "you" is the second person singular.
    You is both the second person singular and the second person plural. It can be both. And it is both. And the fact you can't understand that doesn't affect English grammar.

    You still haven't supported that claim with anything but you saying it.

    My team, however, has provided at least 3 outside sources which support "you all" as the second person plural.

    _J_ on
  • tuxkamentuxkamen really took this picture. Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Yes, it is a dialect-based usage (note the 'chiefly Southern U.S.'). It is grammatically regular.

    It is, however, exactly like me saying 'They all wanted more onion rings'. The all is not necessary to the existence of the third-person pronoun.

    tuxkamen on

    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Thus, the others all die before tuxkamen dies to the vote. Hence, tuxkamen survives, village victory.
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • GlaealGlaeal Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The fact that it may not be necessary does not mean that it is improper.

    Glaeal on
Sign In or Register to comment.