Y'all come back now
There is an illegitimate, plural possessive form of "you" that exposes a strange hole in American English. It comes up even when one is dealing with well-educated and usually articulate speakers. Like many Americans, I learned English by ear, and boast a near-total ignorance of formal rules of grammar, but I know a bogus term when I hear one... and that term is "your guyses." Example: "I am not sure when your guyses' contract expires."
Let's think about why this term exists. I am in a meeting at this very moment in which the term was just used. It was addressed to a small group of people with collective ownership of a thingamajig. Why would'nt "your" have sufficed? In fact, possessive aside, why do we *ever* choose "you guys" over "you?"
It would seem to me that we speakers of English have a need for something more concrete... a specific second-person pronoun that is plural. According to your Strunks and Whites, "you" in fact fills both the singular and plural. And yet, this still seems to cause a certain itchiness, a certain uneasiness, with most. We speakers of English crave second person plural specificity, further evidenced by a similar term invented by Southerners to fill this same purpose: "y'all."
"You guys" and "y'all" slip easily if incorrectly enough into our vernacular until this matter of the possessive comes along. That's when things fall apart, at least, to the discerning ears of tiny dog. And yet, I have no solution for those who crave possessive plural pronoun specificity short of inventing a new word, as the Southerners have done.
Surely we do not want to start a precedent of legitimizing Southern turns of phrase, however, so that leaves us nowhere. If your guyses' thoughts lend any new perspective on this issue, please enlighten the readers of tiny dog.
Let's think about why this term exists. I am in a meeting at this very moment in which the term was just used. It was addressed to a small group of people with collective ownership of a thingamajig. Why would'nt "your" have sufficed? In fact, possessive aside, why do we *ever* choose "you guys" over "you?"
It would seem to me that we speakers of English have a need for something more concrete... a specific second-person pronoun that is plural. According to your Strunks and Whites, "you" in fact fills both the singular and plural. And yet, this still seems to cause a certain itchiness, a certain uneasiness, with most. We speakers of English crave second person plural specificity, further evidenced by a similar term invented by Southerners to fill this same purpose: "y'all."
"You guys" and "y'all" slip easily if incorrectly enough into our vernacular until this matter of the possessive comes along. That's when things fall apart, at least, to the discerning ears of tiny dog. And yet, I have no solution for those who crave possessive plural pronoun specificity short of inventing a new word, as the Southerners have done.
Surely we do not want to start a precedent of legitimizing Southern turns of phrase, however, so that leaves us nowhere. If your guyses' thoughts lend any new perspective on this issue, please enlighten the readers of tiny dog.
posted by Strikethru at
12:22 PM
9 Comments:
I'm not so sure about a plural possessive, but I do think it's a shame that we've done away with the plural "you" in English ("ye"), and then went on a subsequent rampage to purge its equivalent from high school foreign language textbooks (the Spanish "vosotros" -- incidentally, I've heard people use it in Barcelona, so my teacher lied when he said nobody really uses it) lest it confuse American school kids. But as for an English plural possessive...if "you" becomes "your," then how about "ye" becoming "yer?"
(In retrospect, that first sentence was rather lengthy. I guess I was damaged by that Mark Moford guy's horrible prose!)
"Ye"... I like it... who was in charge of expunging that from the lexicon? Ye of little faith, that's who.
I also vaguely remember the way "vosotros" was called out as being on the lingual bubble in my high school Spanish textbooks. What up with that?? Why not just phase out other totally necessary words for which there is no equivalent, if we're going to take down "ye" and "vosotros"?!
As for yer, let's try it out: (said to committe members) "I am not sure when yer contract expires." Hmm... could sound like a sloppy "your..." might require some annunciation.
I advise people to try this one out and see what reaction ye get.
So, this link http://www.braser.com/sshelp/idh_vosotros.htm implies that the prejudice against "Vosotros" is entirely an American invention, simply because we are jealous that we have no equivalent term, although we badly need one. Imperial American bastards!
I have no problems with the term "y'all" as the plural of "you.
Also no problems with "Whee doggies!" as an exclamation of happy surprise.
Maybe you shouldn't be asking me.
I like the plural possessive "y'allses". As in "Hey, y'all got y'allses ID? They card at this here bar."
Except that in fact, the posessive form of "y'all" is "y'alls," which I happen to know based on many summers spent in the wilds of suburban Little Rock, AR.
Example: "Come get y'all's vokes" (Vokes being vodka and Coke, a drink so named by my cousin.)
I'm southern and use like quite frequently... OK, all the time.
I don't think I ever say "ya'll's" though. (?) I might be wrong, but I don't think so. i never understood why someone would say "your guyses"...
I meant "ya'll", not "like." Don't know what I'm thinking.
Nobody understands why anyone would say "your guyses." It is a function of stubborn West coast peoples refusing to adopt the obviously superior "y'all's" on the false premise that some how "your guyses" sounds less regional and silly.
Post a Comment
<< Home