Talk:y'all'd'nt've

RFV discussion: August 2022–February 2023

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

y'all'd'nt've

y'all'dn't've

Yes, you can derive this legitimately by combining morphemes- but does anyone actually use this? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

It seems to be fairly widely recognized, a quick Google Books search returned this list of contractions.

Ioaxxere (talk) 15:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

That's a mention, not a use. 142.166.21.76 15:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't mean using that book as a citation, I'm saying that it directly states that this contraction is used (albeit on the "rarest of occasions").

Ioaxxere (talk) 15:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

By the way, I've moved the content of the page to y'all'dn't've as this seems to be the most common spelling. Ioaxxere (talk) 15:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I'dn't've seen any hits on Usenet if I'd've searched yesterday and I don't see any today, alas. I only see one hit even for "you'dn't've" (and it's a mention, "I almost spelt this as you'dn't've"). Even on Twitter, most hits are mentions, or ungrammatical jokes ("y’all’dn’t’ve be ready for my swag"), although there are valid uses (1 2 3), maybe enough of them to consider it cited if we're accepting twitter these days (bah). - -sche (discuss) 16:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't know if this matters to CFI, but all of the previously linked Twitter citations look like they're only using it in a forced way to make a jocular point about grammar (you may need to read the previous messages in the thread to see the context). I suppose it could be argued that they nevertheless convey meaning and aren't just mentions. At the very least, this entry probably deserves a label of (rare, humorous), since the contraction appears to be unused outside of jokes. 142.166.21.76 23:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. I don't think anyone uses this seriously. Theknightwho (talk) 14:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

CFI Vote for y'all'dn't've

• Keep as a colloquialism. Ioaxxere (talk) 04:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

  I would vote to keep this, but there aren't any cites on either entry... AG202 (talk) 22:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. Binarystep (talk) 05:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Should not be a vote. RFV works on citations. Equinox ◑ 22:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Until someone digs up a few old interviews or something, I guess Twitter will have to do then. Ioaxxere (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

RFV Passed. (2-0) Ioaxxere (talk) 06:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)