Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 76

Thread: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Clinging desperately to planet Earth
    Posts
    474
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 474 Times in 281 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    What I simply cannot abide is "you guys's". I've seen many an otherwise intelligent person reduced to an absolute moron by the use of that phrase.
    Why? It's a perfectly clear possessive.

    I teach grammar for a living, but I admit the often totally arbitrary and elitist rules of insistence on certain constructions. "Ain't," for example, is perfectly clear and precise. There is no reason not to use it except for adherence to a kind of cultural protocol that is set up to distinguish the educated from the non-educated. And even though I am an educator, the elitism and classism that education has bolstered over the modern centuries is an injustice.
    "Y'all" is also quite clear. These terms exist and persist because they work and fill a gap in the formal rules of usage.
    Emphasis added. - No. Nothing elitist about being able to communicate properly within society What? I'm poor so I don't need to be able to be understood? These things entered the lexicon because of ignorance and the lack of, or acceptance of (you can lead a horse to water...) a proper education (breakdown of family structure that values education at work there), and perpetuated by its greater allowance within the culture at large (heaven forbid there actually be rules and structure in human societal existence) How quaint he needs subtitles. Coupled with the refusal of liberal and progressive educators to hold pupils to anything but the lowest standard (if any standard at all) and you have the eventual acceptance of such vulgarities as those offered here. Granted, the one I offered is problematic because English doesn't offer a distinct plural form of You/your, and there seems to be a natural desire for one where it isn't needed. Don't yous agree with I?

    The sky is the limit with kids. Expect nothing and that's what you'll get. But hold them to a higher standard and they'll come closer than you expect. Case in point - my son will never say yeah. It is always YES every time. Thank you Mr. Kurtz.
    Yes! Yes! And, yes!

    As for understanding you singular and you plural, what is so hard to understand? The verb case if nothing else tells you whether it is singular or plural. Tsherbs at least should understand that.

    I'll ask; Tsherbs, are your objections to grammatical rules and -- dare I say it -- 'proper grammar' part and parcel to a greater objection to the existence of 'rules' ?

  2. #42
    Senior Member manoeuver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Near Midwest, US
    Posts
    1,594
    Thanks
    1,227
    Thanked 1,081 Times in 555 Posts
    Rep Power
    15

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by An old bloke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    What I simply cannot abide is "you guys's". I've seen many an otherwise intelligent person reduced to an absolute moron by the use of that phrase.
    Why? It's a perfectly clear possessive.

    I teach grammar for a living, but I admit the often totally arbitrary and elitist rules of insistence on certain constructions. "Ain't," for example, is perfectly clear and precise. There is no reason not to use it except for adherence to a kind of cultural protocol that is set up to distinguish the educated from the non-educated. And even though I am an educator, the elitism and classism that education has bolstered over the modern centuries is an injustice.
    "Y'all" is also quite clear. These terms exist and persist because they work and fill a gap in the formal rules of usage.
    Emphasis added. - No. Nothing elitist about being able to communicate properly within society What? I'm poor so I don't need to be able to be understood? These things entered the lexicon because of ignorance and the lack of, or acceptance of (you can lead a horse to water...) a proper education (breakdown of family structure that values education at work there), and perpetuated by its greater allowance within the culture at large (heaven forbid there actually be rules and structure in human societal existence) How quaint he needs subtitles. Coupled with the refusal of liberal and progressive educators to hold pupils to anything but the lowest standard (if any standard at all) and you have the eventual acceptance of such vulgarities as those offered here. Granted, the one I offered is problematic because English doesn't offer a distinct plural form of You/your, and there seems to be a natural desire for one where it isn't needed. Don't yous agree with I?

    The sky is the limit with kids. Expect nothing and that's what you'll get. But hold them to a higher standard and they'll come closer than you expect. Case in point - my son will never say yeah. It is always YES every time. Thank you Mr. Kurtz.
    Yes! Yes! And, yes!

    As for understanding you singular and you plural, what is so hard to understand? The verb case if nothing else tells you whether it is singular or plural. Tsherbs at least should understand that.

    I'll ask; Tsherbs, are your objections to grammatical rules and -- dare I say it -- 'proper grammar' part and parcel to a greater objection to the existence of 'rules' ?
    It looks to me like you're strawmanning Tsherbs here, Mr. Bloke.
    Proper Grammar is certainly a thing, and it's important to grasp it well.
    Being horrified by deviations from proper grammar is a choice.
    So is being interested in those deviations.
    Making that choice in no way requires objecting to any of the rules or the existence or use of proper grammar.

    If you was a perfectly unambiguous second-person plural we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to manoeuver For This Useful Post:

    eachan (December 21st, 2020)

  4. #43
    Senior Member FredRydr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Carlisle, Pennsylvania USA
    Posts
    4,909
    Thanks
    1,396
    Thanked 6,390 Times in 2,505 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by manoeuver View Post
    ...If you was a perfectly unambiguous second-person plural ....
    What th...!?

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to FredRydr For This Useful Post:

    manoeuver (December 21st, 2020)

  6. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by An old bloke View Post
    .....As for understanding you singular and you plural, what is so hard to understand? The verb case if nothing else tells you whether it is singular or plural. Tsherbs at least should understand that.
    Situation: three students are standing in front of me, and I ask, "Are you planning on skipping school tomorrow?" How does the verb form indicate how many of the students I am addressing? The whole point, if you know your grammar, is that the verb is plural even for the singular "you." If I could say "is," then there would be a bit more clarity.

    I'll ask; Tsherbs, are your objections to grammatical rules and -- dare I say it -- 'proper grammar' part and parcel to a greater objection to the existence of 'rules' ?
    NO, sir. I enforce strict rules with my students daily. I've even been the head of discipline at my school. As I noted, my job is to teach grammar: I am an English teacher, near my retirement. I correct students daily on their deportment, manners, and speaking. But I also am wary of classist claims of superiority of proper English over the vernacular. Most people who love the language love the power, efficacy, and legitimacy of the vernacular and colloquial (and regional) expressions.

    Amiright?

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TSherbs For This Useful Post:

    CrayonAngelss (December 21st, 2020), eachan (December 21st, 2020), manoeuver (December 21st, 2020)

  8. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Clinging desperately to planet Earth
    Posts
    474
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 474 Times in 281 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    My statement regarding verb tense was in error. I realized that later. Your example is correct.

    I agree to a point with your statement regarding the vernacular. I offer that its use can cause a lack of clarity. The meaning of a word used in the vernacular may not be universal. For instance, would you understand what a Sydneysider is? Or, what is meant if I said someone was a 'Westie'? Or, what or where the big smoke is? Without this discussion, I for one wouldn't have known that 'yinz' meant second personal plural and not a group of people named Yin if someone used it verbally.

    Perhaps I am overly concerned about clarity of language, possibly to the point of obsession.

    In my working life, in my profession, intention, meaning, and clarity of what one said had, without overstating the matter, potentially disastrous and lethal consequences. It is for that reason, I hesitate to consider proper usage classist or elitist.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to An old bloke For This Useful Post:

    Jon Szanto (December 21st, 2020), TSherbs (December 21st, 2020)

  10. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by An old bloke View Post
    My statement regarding verb tense was in error. I realized that later. Your example is correct.

    I agree to a point with your statement regarding the vernacular. I offer that its use can cause a lack of clarity. The meaning of a word used in the vernacular may not be universal. For instance, would you understand what a Sydneysider is? Or, what is meant if I said someone was a 'Westie'? Or, what or where the big smoke is? Without this discussion, I for one wouldn't have known that 'yinz' meant second personal plural and not a group of people named Yin if someone used it verbally.

    Perhaps I am overly concerned about clarity of language, possibly to the point of obsession.

    In my working life, in my profession, intention, meaning, and clarity of what one said had, without overstating the matter, potentially disastrous and lethal consequences. It is for that reason, I hesitate to consider proper usage classist or elitist.
    I get your point.

    Of course, audience and context mean everything. And, again, knowledge of the standard rules of English matters greatly.

    But Biber called people "morons" who spoke or wrote out of the realm of proper grammatical expression, and I objected to that characterization of what is actually very clear English in something like "y'all" or "ain't" or "yous." These things are too often sneered at, and I find the contempt, in this case, misplaced. Especially since this thread is about the ambiguity in English around the singular/plural usages of "you." We all know that this SOUNDS less sophisticated, but my point was to not turn this into the injustice of prejudice.

  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TSherbs For This Useful Post:

    CrayonAngelss (December 21st, 2020), Jon Szanto (December 21st, 2020), manoeuver (December 21st, 2020), Ole Juul (December 21st, 2020)

  12. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,118
    Thanks
    874
    Thanked 2,528 Times in 1,299 Posts
    Rep Power
    13

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    And to muddy the waters a little, during a face-to-face conversation spoken language is augmented by visual cues, most of which are outside of our immediate awareness and are likely to influence the words chosen.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (December 22nd, 2020)

  14. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bagasengia
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 29 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    14

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    But Biber called people "morons" who spoke or wrote out of the realm of proper grammatical expression, and I objected to that characterization of what is actually very clear English in something like "y'all" or "ain't" or "yous." These things are too often sneered at, and I find the contempt, in this case, misplaced. Especially since this thread is about the ambiguity in English around the singular/plural usages of "you." We all know that this SOUNDS less sophisticated, but my point was to not turn this into the injustice of prejudice.
    Well this is rich. Contempt? Hardly. I just said I couldn't abide it. As for the "injustice of prejudice," perhaps had you not equated education and speaking proper English with elitism...
    Sent from my constipated POS computer at work.

  15. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by manoeuver View Post
    It's interesting, here's what I know...

    second person plural is the same as the formal second person address in a number of languages, the ones I know of the top of my head are French (vous) and Russian (вы)

    From what I understand, the analog in English is actually you. What we lost was the informal singular, thee. So is you already plural? That would explain why we're casting about for the right word and kludging together words to communicate effectively. Some solutions others have mentioned:

    y'all, a contraction of you all, Southern US, esp TX.

    yinz, Pittsburgh. (never heard this in PA Dutch country, I grew up nearby. I can check with some friends who live there.)

    yous or youse, common in NYC/NJ and Australia.

    I find myself youseing the term all. Hello all. Sometimes you all. I did live in Texas for a while, but y'all didn't make it back to Jerz with me.

    ok, whatchoo got?
    you'ins

  16. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    What I simply cannot abide is "you guys's". I've seen many an otherwise intelligent person reduced to an absolute moron by the use of that phrase.
    Biber, this post comes before mine, and is the one that I was referring to. I do not initiate the criticism here; you do. I then responded to it.

    I see that I should have quoted "absolute moron" to be more accurate.

    This is the contempt that I meant. Would "scorn" or "derision" or "hauteur" or "disparagement" be a better term?

    Are you suggesting that I am the prejudiced one for having pointed out the possibility of prejudice?

  17. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bagasengia
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 29 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    14

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Do you know the definition of moron? For more than half a century it was defined clinically (as it originated) two steps above idiot and one higher than imbecile. It was actually a level on a greater scale of mental retardation. As I understand it, the term was discarded from clinical psychological use because of its more prevalent colloquial usage as a derogatory reference, which is where it remains today - a turn of phrase. No, you shouldn't have quoted the term, you should have quoted the whole sentence: "I've seen many an otherwise intelligent person reduced to an absolute moron by the use of that phrase." So what could I possibly have meant by that? Could it be that intelligent people sound decidedly less so when they say certain things? Whether you like it or not, people are judged by the way they speak. You are. I am. Everybody is. And again, whether you like it or not, so too do people judge. You do. I do. Everybody does. In my post I was merely stating an instance and criteria where I make such a judgement. I wasn't referencing you or anyone in particular. Contempt? That's a bit strong. Saying something that makes one sound less intelligent is hardly contemptuous. I'll have to think about that one. What is needed is a term that doesn't have motivation but is purely reactionary.

    So why are you so offended? Does it apply to you? Do you say "you guys's"? I would venture to guess that you probably don't, though if and when you do, you probably have a good idea of what I would think. Not that it matters now does it? No, it doesn't, not at all. It seems to me that your offence is wholly and utterly feigned.

    But what bothers me was your reaction that somehow speaking proper English, and education generally, is somehow elitist. Within the last decade or so that term has become quite a sensitive, and divisive touch word. What did you mean by it? There's your prejudice. Not in calling somebody stupid.

    You can have the last word. I've already spent more energy on this than it deserves.
    Last edited by Biber; December 22nd, 2020 at 09:06 AM.
    Sent from my constipated POS computer at work.

  18. #52
    Senior Member manoeuver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Near Midwest, US
    Posts
    1,594
    Thanks
    1,227
    Thanked 1,081 Times in 555 Posts
    Rep Power
    15

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Thanks Biber for your constructive contribution to our fun conversation and object lesson on how to interact with grownups. please do fuck off post haste.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to manoeuver For This Useful Post:

    eachan (December 22nd, 2020)

  20. #53
    Senior Member Ole Juul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Coalmont, BC, Canada
    Posts
    404
    Thanks
    561
    Thanked 400 Times in 208 Posts
    Rep Power
    4

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    In these days of over population, and the internet, and the generally impersonal nature of semi anonymous communication, I sense that there is an increase in people's tendency to take things personally. An interesting contrast.

    Maybe that's just my personal perception of contemporary psychology, but for sure it's generally a good idea to try to use "I" messages rather than "you" messages to avoid any bad feelings.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Ole Juul For This Useful Post:

    manoeuver (December 22nd, 2020)

  22. #54
    Senior Member manoeuver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Near Midwest, US
    Posts
    1,594
    Thanks
    1,227
    Thanked 1,081 Times in 555 Posts
    Rep Power
    15

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Hey you, I think we forgot about yez.

    One time on the beach with friends, we started rasslin. some of us ganged up on Johnny Bruno, a Brooklyn Sicilian (and still one of my all-time best friends) and after the tussle was over he said, "It took five of yez to bring me down." That is another good one. Imma start using that one I think.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to manoeuver For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (December 22nd, 2020)

  24. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Biber View Post
    Do you know the definition of moron? For more than half a century it was defined clinically (as it originated) two steps above idiot and one higher than imbecile. It was actually a level on a greater scale of mental retardation. As I understand it, the term was discarded from clinical psychological use because of its more prevalent colloquial usage as a derogatory reference, which is where it remains today - a turn of phrase. No, you shouldn't have quoted the term, you should have quoted the whole sentence: "I've seen many an otherwise intelligent person reduced to an absolute moron by the use of that phrase." So what could I possibly have meant by that? Could it be that intelligent people sound decidedly less so when they say certain things? Whether you like it or not, people are judged by the way they speak. You are. I am. Everybody is. And again, whether you like it or not, so too do people judge. You do. I do. Everybody does. In my post I was merely stating an instance and criteria where I make such a judgement. I wasn't referencing you or anyone in particular. Contempt? That's a bit strong. Saying something that makes one sound less intelligent is hardly contemptuous. I'll have to think about that one. What is needed is a term that doesn't have motivation but is purely reactionary.

    So why are you so offended? Does it apply to you? Do you say "you guys's"? I would venture to guess that you probably don't, though if and when you do, you probably have a good idea of what I would think. Not that it matters now does it? No, it doesn't, not at all. It seems to me that your offence is wholly and utterly feigned.

    But what bothers me was your reaction that somehow speaking proper English, and education generally, is somehow elitist. Within the last decade or so that term has become quite a sensitive, and divisive touch word. What did you mean by it? There's your prejudice. Not in calling somebody stupid.

    You can have the last word. I've already spent more energy on this than it deserves.
    I know what "moron" means. I am not sure why you go into this (?).

    I am not offended. I am not sure where you even get that impression. If I were offended, I would tell you so in plain English. You don't seem to appreciate someone disagreeing with the "judgment" you make. Of course we are all subjected to judgments by others. But that does not mean that they are "fair" or "good" or "helpful" or "productive" or whatever. Maybe you have not seen what I have written: I am a teacher and I teach proper grammar and expression for a living. I value proper expression immensely, and I am paid to do so.

    But no one is an "absolute moron" for sliding into poor grammar or some sort of colloquial expression. And, as I say, there is an aspect of my job (the teaching of proper English) that bolsters some folks' sense of superiority and judgment against others. And there is a long cultural history of the superiority of the educated over the uneducated in the history of humanity, of the refined over the unrefined. From my point of view (and I am highly educated, but not all that refined), I find that history a form of injustice.
    Last edited by TSherbs; December 22nd, 2020 at 10:26 AM.

  25. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TSherbs For This Useful Post:

    Brgphilly (December 23rd, 2020), dneal (December 22nd, 2020), eachan (December 22nd, 2020), Jon Szanto (December 22nd, 2020), manoeuver (December 23rd, 2020)

  26. #56
    Senior Member VertOlive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Gulf of Mexico
    Posts
    3,886
    Thanks
    4,128
    Thanked 3,788 Times in 1,642 Posts
    Rep Power
    14

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    From what I hear in Texas:

    = 3 is “y’all”

    > 3 calls for “all y’all”

    Possessive is y’all’s

    My big linguistic discovery here is the use of “whenever” in place of “when” in almost every instance, that’s new to me. I think it’s more recent since my Dad was born in Texas but never used it.

    What do all y’all think?
    Last edited by VertOlive; December 23rd, 2020 at 07:55 AM.
    "Nolo esse salus sine vobis ...” —St. Augustine

  27. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by VertOlive View Post
    From what I hear in Texas:

    = 3 is “y’all”

    > 3 calls for “all y’all”

    Possessive is y’all’s

    My big linguistic discovery here is the use of “whenever” in place of “when” in almost every instance, that’s new to me. I think it’s more recent since my Dad was born in Texas but never used it.

    What do all y’all think?
    I'm good with the first part, but the "whenever" substitution seems a real strain on meaning.

  28. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Clinging desperately to planet Earth
    Posts
    474
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 474 Times in 281 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by VertOlive View Post
    From what I hear in Texas:

    = 3 is “y’all”

    > 3 calls for “all y’all”

    Possessive is y’all’s

    My big linguistic discovery here is the use of “whenever” in place of “when” in almost every instance, that’s new to me. I think it’s more recent since my Dad was born in Texas but never used it.

    What do all y’all think?
    I'm good with the first part, but the "whenever" substitution seems a real strain on meaning.
    I'll pose a question here since, as I said before clarity of language are important to me, and I have a tendency to thing abstractly. Recognising that language and the meaning of a given word are often misused and, may from misuse, lose their meaning, could it be that 'whenever' originally meant a time more distant, more abstract, or more unlikely than what 'when' meant?

  29. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by An old bloke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by VertOlive View Post
    From what I hear in Texas:

    = 3 is “y’all”

    > 3 calls for “all y’all”

    Possessive is y’all’s

    My big linguistic discovery here is the use of “whenever” in place of “when” in almost every instance, that’s new to me. I think it’s more recent since my Dad was born in Texas but never used it.

    What do all y’all think?
    I'm good with the first part, but the "whenever" substitution seems a real strain on meaning.
    I'll pose a question here since, as I said before clarity of language are important to me, and I have a tendency to thing abstractly. Recognising that language and the meaning of a given word are often misused and, may from misuse, lose their meaning, could it be that 'whenever' originally meant a time more distant, more abstract, or more unlikely than what 'when' meant?
    According to my copy of the OED, "when ever" (initially two words) comes into first recorded use in 1380. The meaning is as we use it today, but the editors add that it also had an additional layer of meaning of "time weakened or lost." I don't know what that means, and the sample sentence is by Wycliffe in Middle English, so....I don't really understand it.

    Interesting question, though.

  30. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Clinging desperately to planet Earth
    Posts
    474
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 474 Times in 281 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: Yous guys wanna talk about second person plurals in here?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by An old bloke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by VertOlive View Post
    From what I hear in Texas:

    = 3 is “y’all”

    > 3 calls for “all y’all”

    Possessive is y’all’s

    My big linguistic discovery here is the use of “whenever” in place of “when” in almost every instance, that’s new to me. I think it’s more recent since my Dad was born in Texas but never used it.

    What do all y’all think?
    I'm good with the first part, but the "whenever" substitution seems a real strain on meaning.
    I'll pose a question here since, as I said before clarity of language are important to me, and I have a tendency to thing abstractly. Recognising that language and the meaning of a given word are often misused and, may from misuse, lose their meaning, could it be that 'whenever' originally meant a time more distant, more abstract, or more unlikely than what 'when' meant?
    According to my copy of the OED, "when ever" (initially two words) comes into first recorded use in 1380. The meaning is as we use it today, but the editors add that it also had an additional layer of meaning of "time weakened or lost." I don't know what that means, and the sample sentence is by Wycliffe in Middle English, so....I don't really understand it.

    Interesting question, though.
    The OED is my dictionary of choice and my primary reference. The Cambridge is my second choice followed by the Collins.

    I would say that 'time weakened or lost' may agree with the proposition that it means 'more abstract' if we use 'vague' as definition.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •