Talk:y'all

Please note that this term is never properly used to refer to a single person, as it is found in some literature. Y'all is always plural. --Bill 18:09, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I've seen Texans address a single person as "y'all". Maybe that's just Texas, but I've always taken that as meaning "you and yours". Thus the orginal definition. This seems like a testable hypothesis. You shouldn't hear, for example Y'all need to be quiet! directed at a single person, but you might well hear Y'all are always welcome! so addressed.

I was born, raised, and lived mostly in the South and the only time that I can remember hearing y'all addressed to one person (other than the TV which nearly always gets it wrong!) is when the one person represents a collectiv. For byspel, one might walk into a store and say, "How y'all doing?" meaning the clerk and everyone working there or if you're talking to an official representing a bureaucracy ... "What are y'all goin' do about it?" ... meaning not the person you're talking to but the agency who would likely answer with we. If someone said y'all to me and I was by myself, I'd look around me to see if the person was thinking I was with someone else. For me, y'all is always plural. --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! 12:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I would count the latter as a specialized sense of the word. I'd prefer to restore it to that status partly because (at least potentially) not all speakers who would use y'all would use it Texas-style, and partly because the definition as it stands is well-nigh unreadable.

Finally, I'm only mostly sure about the Texas part. Can any native Texans confirm or deny? -dmh 22:44, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As a Texan, it’s all right to use Y'all need to be quiet! when addressing one person, but it’s still a plural. The plural softens the command. If you used the singular 'You need to be quiet!', it sounds harsh and threatening. —Stephen 12:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

I lived in San Antonio and then San Angelo for about a total of a year and a half and I'v been back a few times. I'v NEVER heard anyone addressing ONE person as y'all. I'm not saying that it didn't happen but I never heard it outside of what I'v noted above.--AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! 12:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Keep in mind that the South is a large place with lots of folks. There may be some who, IMO, wrongly use y'all when talking to one person (unless that person represents a collectiv, see above) but there are lots of folks who use lots of words wrong. Just because a few do it, that doesn't make it right. For non-Southerners, DO NOT use y'all when talking to one person.--AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! 12:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm a bit late to the party, but the only people I've heard using "y'all" as a singular were a couple who came from the Midwest, had moved to the Virginia suburbs of D.C., and adamantly insisted that they knew what they were talking about because they lived in "the South." (I'm New England born and bred, but I suspect I know more actual Southerners than they did.)

I suppose it's possible that some native Southerners use it, but I'd really like to see some documentation that it's a actually established usage, even informal, and notes on where it's used. I strongly suspect that any singular usage is either not truly referring to one person, as described above, or transplants using it as a folksy synonyn for "you."

On othe other hand, if you get enough people moving to the urban South and trying to act like natives, I could imagine that it would become established, particularly among the second generation. But regardless, it would be useful to have sources documenting the phenomenon, since we can discuss anecdotes until the cows come home. —Quintucket (talk) 05:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Can somebody who knows what they're talking about please add a note explaining "all y'all"? Might be related to DMH's query. (I'm from California, so I don't have a clue.) -DM 2 Sep 2005

This stems from a phrase such as: I will see all of you all in two weeks. Instead of, I suppose: I will see only-the-top-halfs of you all in two weeks. No, actually, it stems from the basic need, in English, of a dedicated plural form of "you" (a word which can be either plural or singular in English). This plural form of "you" is what "y'all" tries to fill. Thus, "y'all" refers to "you - the group" as opposed to "you - the individual". Consequently, when I get back in two weeks, I hope to see all of the group, not just part of the group. Therefore, I hope to see the entirety of you, the group. Talking more loosely, we have: I hope to see all of you all, or, I hope to see all y'all. Hope this helps. Cheers, --Stranger 02:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Oh, incidentally, I googled "all y'all" and got 123,000 hits, in case you were wondering. --Stranger 02:02, 3 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Just did another google search of "all y'all" and got 114,000,000 hits. Shows the increase of information available online between 2005 and 2018. -- 13:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Put simply, the difference between "y'all" and "all y'all" is exactly the same as the difference between "you" and "all of you" (when both are directed to two or more people), "us" vs. "all of us," or "them" vs. "all of them" in standard English. "All y'all" only sounds redundant because the same word "all" employed twice, first as the actual quantifier "all," and then as a simple plural marker.

For that reason, I edited out the "tous" in "vous tous" as a French equivalent. "Vous tous" is more like saying "all y'all" than merely "y'all." For that, "vous" alone will suffice. I suspect the same problem may exist with the alleged Italian equivalent.

Can anyone comment on the reasoning behind listing "y'alls" as the possessive? I have always written "y'all's" instead. This seems to make more sense in the absence of any good reason to go against normal possessive form. (N.B.: I'm not the user who tried to make that change recently and apparently had it reverted as "nonsense" (!).) -YorkBW 22:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

In the absence of a response, I'm going to change "y'alls" back to "y'all's." Comments welcome. -YorkBW 12:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure which spelling is more common, but "y'alls" makes more sense to me. Other possessive pronouns (e.g., his, hers, ours and theirs) do not take apostrophes, so why should y'alls? -Xrlq 18:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

But you can’t say "that’s hers purse" or "this is theirs ticket". I always write y’all’s with two apostrophe: "here are y’all’s bus tickets." I think the only people who regularly use this word and who would write "y'alls tickets" would also write "Mikes tickets" or "peoples tickets". —Stephen 12:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Probably an unnoticed disruptive contributor trying to assert that it is OK to use two apostrophes in an English word (which, of course, is never OK.) --Connel MacKenzie 17:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

There remain too many oddities with this entry. Only the nonstandard possessive is listed, (of a nonstandard term,) where normally no possessives are listed, invalid headings, etymology listed on inflection line, strange characterization as AAVE (which on first blush seems astoundingly unlikely,) and a homophone which, in my dialect, is not even close to being homophonic. This might be better off deleted and restarted fresh. --Connel MacKenzie 18:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Some English words use two apostrophes (bo's'n). I have never heard of a rule against doing that when the orthography and grammar call for it. As for the article, and as a person from the y'all dialect area, I don’t find anything wrong with the article. —Stephen 12:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you must add the two apostrophes, it should technically be y'alls'.Mikey85123 (talk) 00:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

y’all’s = y’all is = you all is which doesn’t make sense. It’s the same difference as It’s vs its. That’s its meaning. :)

text removed from entry

Rubbish. The spelling is y'all (you all). The spelling ya'll is a different contraction (ya will), as in "if ya'll build a fire, we can roast some marshmallows." The plural of this is "if y'all'll build a fire, we can roast some marshmallows." —Stephen 20:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

FWIW, I agree with Stephen. The right way to write it is y'all and ya'll has a different meaning. Good explanation Stephen! --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! 13:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm from El Paso, I spell it ya'll because in my mind it's a contraction of the casual Texan phrase "ya all", e.g. "Ya all gonna head out now?". I hadn't thought about "ya will" before, but it makes sense; and, adopting the convention you're claiming would be a good way to distinguish whether you mean "you/ya all", "you/ya will", and "you/ya will all". I guess distinguishing "you" from the more colorful "ya" is less important. — This unsigned comment was added by 73.158.219.245 (talk).

The adamance of the objection is noted (see http://en.wikipedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wikipedia:How_many_legs_does_a_horse_have%3F). And yes, though not strictly relevant to this topic, there is another word spelled "ya'll." See http://en.wikipedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Homonym for an explanation of this phenomenon.

This is absolutely incorrect:

Though "y'all" has gained acceptance through common usage, "ya'll" is the correct spelling. Language is born in the mouth and contractions are formed when the phonology of a word obviates a sound in a word that follows. Spoken language does not go the other way; a word not yet uttered does not change the form of the word that precedes it. For instance, we do not think, "I'm going to say 'are' after I say 'you' so therefore I will shorten 'you' and say 'y'are.'" Rather it is the second word in a contraction that is truncated because having said the first word, pronouncing the second word fully just feels funny in the mouth. Thus, "you" maintains its full form in "you've," and "you're."

The correct spelling of the contraction for "you all" is "y'all." The above passage is not only wrong, it's silly from an etymological point of view, i.e., pseudo-science.

SteveXS103180 (talk) 15:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

No, both are acceptable. I have several Texan friends who spell it as "ya'll", and others who spell it "y'all." Just like with "traveling" and "travelling," they're both different spellings but both correct.Mythical04 (talk) 20:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you that that passage is wrong, but I don't really understand your point. That passage is not in the entry. Are you suggesting some sort of change somewhere? —Ruakh_TALK 18:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

No, he is commenting on an old comment above that someone made three years ago. He should have replied to the comment directly at Talk:y'all#From the entry. —Stephen ^(Talk) 19:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have moved the comment accordingly. - -sche (discuss) 18:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ya'll is actually the same as y'all, it just isn't grammatically correct. Ya'll is "Ya all" as a contraction. "Ya" attempts to harness the phonetics used when saying "You" with a Southern accent. For example, "What are ya doin'." Again it is grammatically incorrect but that is how it is intended.Mikey85123 (talk) 00:51, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm from Texas and fully agree. "y'all" is a contraction of "you all", while "ya'll" is a contraction of "ya all". And sure, "ya" is an improper word to begin with; but, that's intentional. That's what makes it casual and chummy, for when Texans are in that mood. Hopefully, "ya all" gives you folks claiming that it can only be "y'all" some perspective. Ya all thought ya was smart by pointin' out that the apostrophe goes between the words; but, ya'll didn't even know the word came from "ya all". So how smart was yah? {{unsigned|73.158.219.245}

Is it certain that it is a contraction of "you all" (and as such should be written "y'all")? For example, Dutch has jullie and Sallaands has ieluu. The former is explained as "from jij (“you”) and lui (“people”)", the latter is a compound of "ie" (English: "you") and "luu" (English: "people", "persons"), compare Proto-Germanic *liudiz and Old Church Slavonic людиє (ljudie). --129.125.102.126 23:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'd say that it is certain. As far as I know, the reason for the parallelism is that it happens to be a useful inflected form, but one that was not passed down for etymological reasons which I am not aware of. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

The parallelism isn't only that they have a 2nd person plural (which indeed is a useful inflected form), the appearance of the words is similar too: the word which originally was only used as 2nd person plural, but got to be used also as a 2nd person singular (as a honorific), acquired an 'l'-sound to mark the plural. In English and Sallaands that 'l' has a clear meaning, but in Dutch it doesn't. --129.125.102.126 01:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

FWIW, yes, English etymology dictionaries treat it as certain that "y'all" is from "you all". - -sche (discuss) 19:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Furthermore, it can be contracted again to form the grammatically incorrect word "y'aint", as used in the sentence. "Y'aint gonna do that". It is a contraction of the phrase you all are not and is the longest spoken contraction in the english language. — This unsigned comment was added by 23.228.168.4 (talk).

No analysis is complete without realizing there's actually two phrases that need to be handled: "you all" and "ya all". "y'all" is a contraction of "you all", while "ya'll" is a contraction of the slang "ya all". People up in arms that "ya'll" is wrong because it puts the apostrophe in the wrong place in "you all", simply haven't considered that it's a contraction of "ya all". {{unsigned|73.158.219.245}

The pronunciation of y'all shows that the a is the a of all, not the a of ya. Etymologically, y'all is actually most likely to be technically a contraction of ye all, using the plural ye that is still current in Ireland. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

y'all

Rfv-sense: singular form of "you". —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

This has been fairly thoroughly studied. Some references can be found here at Garner's. We should have some cites. DCDuring TALK 15:59, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

It seems controversial, I personally would not consider "See y'all later" spoken to a single person as being specifically singular, but rather number-neutral. --WikiTiki89 17:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

If we are trying to have a dictionary that helps normal humans I don't think number-neutral in a helpful term, whether or not it is part of linguist's vocabulary. DCDuring TALK 17:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Did I accidentally imply that you have to copy and paste my sentence directly into the entry without changing anything? --WikiTiki89 17:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

OK. Should he have usage notes? Should we call it singular?

This sense has been the subject of regular criticism on the talk page, so citations of it would certainly be appreciated. I expect Wikitiki is right that "y'all" doesn't have "singular you" as a meaning, but only has "plural you" and something like "you; singular or plural you, the two not being distinguished". - -sche (discuss) 18:14, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

While y'all is plural only, it is occasionally said to a sole person. There are several possible explanations for it: (1) lapsus linguae (the speaker is so accustomed to using the plural that he uses it where he should not); (2) the speaker is including the listener’s family, or perhaps his friends or colleagues that regularly accompany him; or (3) the speaker senses that the singular you is too personal and chooses the plural to sound less personal and more distant. —Stephen ^(Talk) 18:49, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I generally agree, but think that with respect to point 3 it is probably the opposite. Rather than being less personal, y'all is more informal, and therefore may be more personal. bd2412 T 19:53, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

As a native speaker of a dialect that includes y'all I can say that option (3) is excluded. Saying y'all to one person in English is nothing at all like saying vous to one person in French. If I say y'all to one person I always mean "you and the people you represent"; for example, if I say to a friend, "How're y'all doing?" I mean "you and your family" and if I say to a supermarket employee, "Do y'all have grits?" I mean "you as a representative of this supermarket". It isn't number-neutral the way you is; it is distinctly plural, though the other members of the group addressed need not be present. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

BD2412, I think you’ve misunderstood what I meant by personal. The word you can be very personal...if I say, "You, come here!"...it sounds very in-your-face and overly personal. It sounds like you’re about to be punished for something. But if I say, "Y'all come here," then it sounds much less in-your-face, less personal, more generalized, softer, and friendlier. —Stephen ^(Talk) 22:53, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I was thinking in terms of personal = informal (i.e. "softer, and friendlier") and impersonal = formal. bd2412 T 00:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

If you said "Y'all come here" to me, I would look around to see who else you were speaking to, and if there was no one else around but me, I would worry you were suffering from double visions or hallucinations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Deleted singular sense. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

I've been noticing an increasing, though probably still small, number of non-Southern / non-AAVE Americans using this. For example, Billie Eilish from California uses it at 1:22, and Mel Magazine, in an interesting article, has examples of a bunch more such uses. My guess (and Mel's) is it's another instance of white Americans adopting useful cultural practices from black Americans / AAVE, though a noticeable portion (noticed by Mel as well as a few various random internet sites that come up when I poke around google) of users are left-wingers who might be taking it from either AAVE or Southern comrades / their perceived 'working class' speech (or who might be being gender-neutral, avoiding you guys, something else Mel suggests may be reinforcing use of the term). I'm not suggesting any change to the label right now (it already says it's only "chiefly" Southern/AAVE), but it's worth monitoring, and possibly expanding the usage notes about. - -sche (discuss) 07:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

American social justice people use "y'all" and "folks" a lot, for some reason. Equinox ◑ 18:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

In the past 2 years I've lived in Massachusetts and California for about 6 months each, and I noticed *no one* in Mass saying y'all (to the point where I dropped it from my speech there) but in California many of the non-black millennials I know use it interchangeably with you guys. When I ask them about it, they often say they don't make a conscious effort to say it, that they just picked it up. A small handful have cited gender neutrality as a reason for the change; no one has said "it's cool to sound black also", but just look at the way white millennials devour black slang they see on social media. I'm not sure about the working class angle, but as Equinox points out, social justice language can be heavy in signifiers, likely based in specific movements. On the east coast at least, I think this is a phenomenon worth noting. Ultimateria (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

(Just recording here that I added a short note about this a few days ago. Finding proper academic sources and more detail would be desirable.) - -sche (discuss) 18:40, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

As another example, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York used y'all today. (She's gotten headlines for using other things that people associated with 'Black English', too.) On the other hand, Steve King of Iowa, despite keeping a Confederate flag on his desk, has never used y'all in a tweet AFAICT, nor has Trump (though he has quoted a few people who did), nor has fellow New Yorker Rudy Giuliani. OTOH, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan has. Anecdotal data points. - -sche (discuss) 01:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

One things I've noticed about y'all is that it's used only once within its scope. Consider the citation at y'all's: “I ought to kick y’all’s asses Walking out on me the way you done, that’s no way to treat a friend.” In my judgment as a native speaker of a y'all-using dialect it would be ungrammatical to say "...the way y'all done" because y'all's has already appeared in the sentence. So you say "When did y'all know you wanted to get married?" but not *"When did y'all know y'all wanted to get married"; or "When did y'all paint your house?" but not *"When did y'all paint y'all's house?". This is why there's no such reflexive pronoun as *y'allselves, because reflexive pronouns always cooccur with the pronouns they refer back to: so you can only say "What do y'all think of yourselves?" and not *"What do y'all think of y'allselves". —Mahāgaja · talk 17:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I googled "(when) did y'all know y'all" and found uses. Equinox ◑ 18:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Having lived in the South, I am familiar with speakers using y'all and then switching to you, but the tendency is not an absolute rule, and repeated use of y'all, with or without you also being intermingled in, also occurs. Judging by the random examples here I plucked off Google Books, even discounting ones which seem to be a non-y'all-user imagining a y'all-user's speech, one reason for repeated use might be if speaking with a (or playing up a) particularly "strong" dialect; I also notice that several of the hits also look like African-American English (which may or may not be AAVE); whether African Americans make repeated use of y'all with greater, lesser, or equal frequency than white Southerners might be worth investigating (along with the frequency of repeated use of y'all in general vs use of y'all+you). As for y'allselves, the fact that plural yourselves and singular yourself are already distinct also seems like it might diminish the perceived need for it, though notwithstanding that google books:"y'allselves" does exist, even though the first hit calls it out as odd. Some hits use it after multiple y'alls, others use it after or together with you; one sentence, speaking of “'do-it-y'allselves' cavers", happens to not require any other use of a second person pronoun. - -sche (discuss) 18:27, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's very interesting, thanks! Just goes to show the importance of "YMMV" disclaimers! —Mahāgaja · talk 11:18, 6 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mahagaja I think it is clear that this switch down from y'all to you mid-thought does exist on some widespread level. What would this type of change be called in linguistics? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Geographyinitiative: I'm not sure exactly, but I think markedness has something to do with it. Languages tend to avoid marked forms whenever they would be redundant, so if y'all is more marked than you, then it makes sense that once y'all has done its job of indicating plurality, it doesn't need to be repeated anymore. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:41, 6 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

y'all

Rfv-sense: "To block discussion on an internet board to restrict dissent". If attestable, I'd be interested in knowing what the etymology is. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ety presumably a social justice thing: . In such circles those who disagree are encouraged to "sit down and shut up", "educate themselves" etc. Equinox ◑ 13:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

On closer inspection this seems to be Reddit slang. Try googling "got y'alled". Equinox ◑ 18:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Etymology from Know Your Meme: "Y'all can't behave." Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I do not think this will be citable. I assert that it is clearly in use. I do not assert that it is clearly in widespread use. Like the emoji crab, it lives in a corner of the internet that Wiktionary does not quote. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 05:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

As in See y’all later spoken to someone without a companion. One possibility is that the speaker means “you and anyone else who may be with you” or “you and anyone else who comes along.” --Backinstadiums (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Language researcher Michael Montgomery has identified a number of situations in which y'allis used as a unique pronoun rather than as a simple contraction of you-all:

1. The "associative" plural, meaning "you as an individual and also your family or associates," as in What are y'all doing for vacation this year? 2. The "institutional" plural, when an individual representing a business or organization is addressed as a representative of other unknown or indeterminable individuals. For example, someone calls a store and asks Do y'all have marine paint? Here the meaning is "you as an individual and the others working there." 3. The "potential" plural that is equivalent to one of you or anyone, as in Did y'all take out the trash? when asking not whether a specific individual has taken out the trash, but whether someone in the household has taken out the trash, that is, whether the trash has been taken out. 4. The "everybody" plural, as in greetings and partings, for example when a teacher says Good morning (or Goodbye) y'all to a room full of students. You-all is not used in these situations. ·

--Backinstadiums (talk) 18:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply