Y'all

[nq:1]The southernism has to do with how it is spelled or just the contraction itself? And if y'all is frowned ... or more people? Simply 'you all'? If so, what are alternatives to that which are not frowned upon? conrad[/nq]
It worls equally well with one or a dozen.
Who frowns upon it and who cares about any who would.

[nq:2]The southernism has to do with how it is spelled ... what are alternatives to that which are not frowned upon?[/nq]
[nq:1]It worls equally well with one or a dozen. Who frowns upon it and who cares about any who would.[/nq]
I think the OP would prefer an answer in English, Ray.

"Y'all" is used mainly in the Southern US, and it is a regular feature of many standard English di

[nq:1]The southernism has to do with how it is spelled or just the contraction itself?[/nq]
It's not really a contraction. It's a spelling of an informal term. A "regionalism" if you prefer.
[nq:1]And if y'all is frowned upon[/nq]
The people who use it don't care if they are frowned upon for using it. It's natural speech to them. Personally, I frown on New Yawkers who say "cawfee" and

[nq:1]The southernism has to do with how it is spelled or just the contraction itself? And if y'all is frowned ... are alternatives to that which are not frowned upon?Here are some personal reflections on "you all" from a Virginia native:[/nq]
Growing up in Virginia in the 1950s, I don't ever recall hearing "you all" used in a singular sense. If used when speaking to a single person, a collect

(in article (Email Removed)):
[nq:1]It made perfect sense to me then and still does. By the way, I rarely heard the contraction "y'all" except in the black English dialect, the most authentic examples of which I have found in the works of William Faulkner.[/nq]
Well I guess you just didn't originate from far enough South.

Reading Faulkner reminds me of the little town of Springfie

[nq:1]"You all" is not an unreasonable correction for the absence of the second person plural in modern English.[/nq]
But, of course, English isn't lacking a second person plural, but a second person singular. "You", which was originally the 2nd person plural only, gradually replaced "thou". By 1600 this change was for the most part completed, although there are still uses of "thou" in the 19t

[nq:2]It made perfect sense to me then and still does. ... which I have found in the works of William Faulkner.[/nq]
[nq:1]Well I guess you just didn't originate from far enough South. Reading Faulkner reminds me of the little town of Springfield, LA, where my grandmother lived. John Varela Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email.[/nq]
Y'all, or you all, is a plural, used for clarity and emphasi

You is both singular and plural. What's so hard about that? Therefore, "y'all" is not good English. Again, what's so hard about it? Who cares if it's origins are from the south or the north or the midwest or wherever else. Glorifying it or any attempt to accept it does not make it acceptable as good English. Poor English is poor English, period.

strike "it's" and insert "its"

[nq:1]You is both singular and plural. What's so hard about that?[/nq]
Nothing. What's unfortunate about it is the confusion that it engenders, to the extent that any confusion is engendered.
[nq:1]Therefore, "y'all" is not good English.[/nq]
I see. Should we also abolish "it" and use "they" for third person singular and plural? Should we abolish "beef" and talk about eating "cow." Sho