This may be a fundamental question, but my new office does not have the new CSI project manual resourse nor the previous MOP.
What is the rule for using or not using the word “all”. I currently avoid using “all” but cannot remember why I do. It just seems redundant.
Thanks,
Wayne
In PRM-MOP Section 5.8.10.3, it lists “any,” “all,” and “such” as articles to avoid.
The reason to avoid using “all,” as you said, is redundant. For example, let’s assume a specification provision states, “Secure gypsum board to metal framing with screws.” It could have been written to read, “Secure all gypsum board to metal framing with screws.” How is that different? It isn’t.
The first sentence obviously applies to gypsum board; it doesn’t say “some” gypsum board, or “Type X” gypsum board, but just gypsum board. So, if it’s gypsum board, screw it. If it’s not gypsum board, look for applicable requirements somewhere else in the project manual.
Another reason for not using “all” is that if “all” is used as a modifier for some items but not others, that implies that “all” does not apply where it is not used.
Let me first write that I agree and gleefully remove the "all"s that exist in sections. However, what about something like “All utilities may not be shown”? To remove “all” changes the meaning. What’s the cleanest, clearest, most concise way to express a thought like this?
“Some utilities may not be shown”?
“Not all utilities may be shown?”?
something like that?
Not only must i strip out the "all"s, but i must strip out the "any and"s that were added in front of them. sheesh.
Toilet Accessories have all-welded construction
Gypsum Board has all-purpose joint compound
Ceramic tile has additives that replace part or all of gaging water.
You can’t get rid of it all. (Intended) But you can certainly remove “all” when it attempts to quantify something.
To answer the question with another question…Would “Some utilities may not be shown” state the intended message?
We have to exercise common sense. Editorial and grammatical rules are intended to put people in the proper frame of mind, and the rules apply most of the time. But they should not replace thinking.
I battle constantly with junior editors who believe the word “that” has no place in formal writing. They delete such words in every instance without reading the context in which they are placed.
The general principle is, you should never use sweeping general terms like the word “all” (or the word never, for that matter…).
“All generalities are false, including this one”. G.K. Chesterton
To all who replied.
Thanks.
Wayne
I’m going to be doing a project in Mississippi. Do I need to change the “all” to “y’all” and when is it proper to use “all y’all?”
y’all can be singular; all y’all is definitely plural - or at least that’s what I’ve been told.
In the southern U. S., “y’all” is second person plural, period. To say that it can be singular is simply incorrect. Other regional dialects of American English make no such distinction between second person singular and plural (except perhaps for “you’uns” or “youse”, which appear to be fading from use, or are actively being suppressed, and where their apparent origin as plural forms may have been forgotten – which misunderstanding is extended, in ignorance, to “y’all”).
The impression that “y’all” can ever have a singular meaning may come from misunderstanding the common hospitable southern expression, “Y’all come back, y’hear?” because it can indeed sometimes be spoken to only one person. However, the implication is always that both the addressee AND his or her family, friend etc. who are with him or her are meant (though the others may already be out in the car, waiting to go…). All of those who are (or were) with the person addressed are included, whether they are still within earshot or not. There are no doubt other instances in which one person is addressed with “y’all” – but the reference is always to more than one (“Why don’t y’all come over this weekend?” means “Why don’t you and your husband, wife, etc. come over…?” even though the person addressed may be alone (except for the speaker) at the time.
So, “y’all” is always plural. The only correct usage of the expression “all y’all” I can imagine would be for clarification, confirmation or emphasis (e.g., “your whole family – that’s right, I mean all 12 of you”). Otherwise, it is simply evidence of misunderstanding.
“Ya’all” may be an acceptable alternate spelling, and “you all” (of which “y’all” is a contraction) is sometimes still heard in parts of the South as well, though not much around here (Houston). Same meaning – plural. The plural possessive ("y’all’s) is also used – not as much – and may not be regarded by some as equally acceptable to "y’all itself.
(This is from someone not born in the South – who was in fact stigmatized in the fourth grade (in Tennessee) by his midwestern accent and speech mannerisms, and learned southern as a second language, but now speaks it with reasonable fluency, and by choice…)
So, remember, y’all – “y’all” is ALWAYS plural…
Robert,
I hope “youse” wrote this thesis off hours.
Back to “all.”
AIA A201, Clause 1.4.1: "In the interest of brevity the Contract Documents frequently omit modifying words such as all and any and articles such as the and an, but the fact that a modifier or an article is absent from one statement and appears in another is not intended to affect the interpretation of either statement.
Thanks
Wayne
This Woodburn - there’s something to him!
Yup, he’s “all that”
With the thread topic in mind, is he “that”?
Are you suggesting we need to modify the “all the King’s horses and all the King’s men” language in the “Large Egg Fall Protection” section?
Or is that just too silly?
It’s Friday afternoon - NOTHING is too silly! “..pretty maids all in a row…”
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
Abraham Lincoln (or so I’m told)
Thank goodness Abe didn’t speak like a specifier would write.