mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
all of the pets Options
azz
Posted: Monday, September 21, 2020 9:42:08 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2014
Posts: 369
Neurons: 3,943
a. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets his housemate had, so he moved.
b. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets, so he moved.
c. Tom couldn't stand all the pets, so he moved.


Could these be used if Tom could stand all of the pets individually, but it was the fact that all of them were together that was unbearable for him? He liked each pet individually, but it was the combination that got on his nerves!

Many thanks.
georgew
Posted: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:11:13 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/13/2016
Posts: 299
Neurons: 1,924
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
azz wrote:
a. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets his housemate had, so he moved.
b. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets, so he moved.
c. Tom couldn't stand all the pets, so he moved.


Could these be used if Tom could stand all of the pets individually, but it was the fact that all of them were together that was unbearable for him? He liked each pet individually, but it was the combination that got on his nerves!

Many thanks.


"All of the pets" would most commonly be understood to mean all of them together. They lose individuality in this usage. "Each" would solve this problem.

thar
Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 12:29:23 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 22,812
Neurons: 92,672
It is not how you would express the idea of all/some.

The negative of 'all' is not any.

In BrE at least, you would use that to say it was the large number of pets that was the problem.
KylieHard21
Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 3:48:09 AM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 9/17/2020
Posts: 15
Neurons: 44
I think it's not true!
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 8:06:19 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,735
Neurons: 1,283,319
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
azz wrote:
a. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets his housemate had, so he moved.
b. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets, so he moved.
c. Tom couldn't stand all the pets, so he moved.


Could these be used if Tom could stand all of the pets individually, but it was the fact that all of them were together that was unbearable for him? He liked each pet individually, but it was the combination that got on his nerves!

I might use "all the pets" in that sense, but not "all of the pets".

A similar point was raised in the "all/any" thread.
FounDit
Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 11:57:39 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 14,481
Neurons: 68,876
azz wrote:
a. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets his housemate had, so he moved.
b. Tom couldn't stand all of the pets, so he moved.
c. Tom couldn't stand all the pets, so he moved.


Could these be used if Tom could stand all of the pets individually, but it was the fact that all of them were together that was unbearable for him? He liked each pet individually, but it was the combination that got on his nerves!

Many thanks.


Yes, that's how I would interpret it. It is the large number that he finds annoying.

As thar said, using "any" would mean Tom didn't like even one of them.


Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.