|
#116042 - 11/15/03 06:01 PM
Re: A question of prescriptive grammar
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Wordwind
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Piedmont Region of Virginia, U...
|
Not sure whether this has anything to do with what you're asking, Faldage, but let's think about how 'you all' evolved. It could be that it was simply a short cut for saying 'all of you'. If so, we could write:
"All of you should listen."
Well, that was just too wordy. So, here in the South we cut to the chase and said,
"You all should listen."
And, finally:
"Y'all should listen."
"You all" began to function as a compound pronoun, so to speak. And so did "y'all" rather than as a pronoun followed by a modifying prepositional phrase as in 'all of you.'
When looking at the possessive form of 'all of you'--well, we've got a slight problem that we can address by changing 'you' to 'your,' obviously:
All of you should listen.
All of your children should listen.
All of yours should listen.
You all should listen. (compound dialectical pronoun form)
You-all's children should listen (compound dialetical pronoun now taking adjectivial form with apostrophe at the end of the compound form)
Y'all's children should listen (the compact edition).
That's how I see it right now, but will wait for further elucidation.
Bill, I never have heard anyone here refer to a singular person as y'all.
|
|
|
|
#116044 - 11/15/03 06:33 PM
Re: A question of prescriptive grammar
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Wordwind
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Piedmont Region of Virginia, U...
|
maahey, what you've said is what I also said, but with more of an emphasis on both the fact that we're dealing with a dialectical construction and a dialectical pronoun in a compound form.
In other words, 'you all' is the second person plural pronoun within that dialect and functions as one word. The second part of this compound word is 'all', and would, therefore, take the apostrophe. All 'all's' are not created equal when examining dialects.
What is very peculiar, however, is the fact that we would add an apostrophe to a pronoun at all. We don't for its, theirs, yours, and ours. So, technically, I would think that y'alls would be the form that followed the others, but it doesn't work for the eye. The apostrophe helps clear up the visual problem: "Y'all's children better get on inside now." Visually that works for me and the meaning is apparent.
|
|
|
|
#116045 - 11/17/03 06:24 PM
Re: A question of prescriptive grammar
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Jackie
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Louisville, Kentucky
|
Faldage, I've been grinning ever since I read your post!
Wordwind gave a wonderful explanation of how it likely evolved. But I doubt there's a "correct" rule for spelling this, because as was pointed out, it is a colloquialism. Until I started putting it here, I don't think I'd ever seen it written, only heard it spoken. And I put your-all's, because your-alls' just doesn't taste right. So, if this is the only place you've seen it written, feel free to correct me right and left--I'm quite honored, to tell you the truth! I suspect the s got migrated down to the end for the same reason words such as spoonfuls and handfuls developed--it just comes easier off the tongue, to speakers of a language where the overwhelming majority of pluralizations are at the end of a word.
|
|
|
|
#116046 - 11/17/03 08:54 PM
Re: A question of prescriptive grammar
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Faldage
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
|
To a certain extent, my tongue was firmly located in my cheek when I posted this; there are no hard and fast spelling rules for what is primarily a spoken dialect, but there is a mistaken idea among many prescriptivists that non-standard usage has no rules. This is far from true. One can, for example, say, "I ain't got no money," but not, "I don't ain't got no money." This despite the fact that it is perfectly correct to say, "I might could use some money." Being a descriptivist is more than just saying anything goes. To be a real descriptivist one must describe what is used. Prescriptivists can just say that something is wrong and then ignore it, but a descriptivist has to say what the rules are and to whom they apply.
|
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,881
Posts224,661
Members9,048
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
79
guests, and
2
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
