Discussion:
all together
(too old to reply)
a***@gmail.com
2018-06-12 17:32:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.

2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.

3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.

4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.

5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.

6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.

Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?


Gratefully,
Navi
Harrison Hill
2018-06-12 17:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
All are grammatical, all are idiomatic, all mean the same thing?

3) "He gave them all in all 500 dollars", is very advanced English :)
Jack
2018-06-12 18:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
You can't tell whether the combining is of the individuals making up
'them', or of a series of payments totalling 500 dollars, or both.
--
John
m***@gmail.com
2018-06-12 21:36:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.

I'd say that they are all grammatical, but remember that nonsense may be grammatical.

Tex
a***@gmail.com
2018-06-13 05:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I'd say that they are all grammatical, but remember that nonsense may be grammatical.
Tex
Thank you all very much,

Could 'all together' in '1' refer to a series of payments?

Gratefully,
Navi
a***@gmail.com
2018-06-13 05:15:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I'd say that they are all grammatical, but remember that nonsense may be grammatical.
Tex
Thank you all very much,

Would you say that


1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.

could be used if I paid them different amounts separately (the sum total
of those amounts being 500 dollars)?

I guess that '5' couldn't mean that. That is what Tex seems to be saying too.

Gratefully,
Navi
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-06-13 06:07:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I agree, though I'd also accept 4.

As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
--
athel
Harrison Hill
2018-06-13 08:09:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I agree, though I'd also accept 4.
As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
Anyone who can pick holes in:

"I watched him score his first goal."

...is speaking a different language to the one I have grown up speaking.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-06-13 10:12:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I agree, though I'd also accept 4.
As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
"I watched him score his first goal."
...is speaking a different language to the one I have grown up speaking.
Yes indeed. But that's because the language you have grown up
speaking is a unique creation of your own and your mother's making.
Any resemblance to English, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-06-13 12:18:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
"I watched him score his first goal."
...is speaking a different language to the one I have grown up speaking.
Yes indeed. But that's because the language you have grown up
speaking is a unique creation of your own and your mother's making.
Any resemblance to English, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
'Fraid he walked right into that one.
Harrison Hill
2018-06-14 07:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I agree, though I'd also accept 4.
As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
"I watched him score his first goal."
...is speaking a different language to the one I have grown up speaking.
Yes indeed. But that's because the language you have grown up
speaking is a unique creation of your own and your mother's making.
Any resemblance to English, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
You can "watch" a football match presumably. A football match consists
of "pass", "throw-in", "pass", "corner", "pass", "goal".

You are (all of you?) saying that you can "watch" the whole thing, but
you can't "watch" any of its components? What sort of logic does that
follow? I know that just because you can "drive" a car, it doesn't mean
that you can "drive" its hub-caps; but these building blocks are exactly
the same as the whole - short sections of it.

I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
about:

"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
Harrison Hill
2018-06-14 07:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
1) He gave them all together 500 dollars.
2) He gave them altogether 500 dollars.
3) He gave them all in all 500 dollars.
4) He gave them 500 dollars between them.
5) He gave them 500 dollars to divide up between themselves.
6) He gave them 500 dollars combined.
Which are grammatical?
Which are idiomatic?
Gratefully,
Navi
To my American ear they all sound strange and ambiguous except #5.
I agree, though I'd also accept 4.
As usual, Harrison's opinion is nonsense. Not content with trying to
persuade everyone that "watch" and "see" mean the same thing, he now
seems to think that "all together" means the same as "altogether".
"I watched him score his first goal."
...is speaking a different language to the one I have grown up speaking.
Yes indeed. But that's because the language you have grown up
speaking is a unique creation of your own and your mother's making.
Any resemblance to English, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
You can "watch" a football match presumably. A football match consists
of "pass", "throw-in", "pass", "corner", "pass", "goal".
You are (all of you?) saying that you can "watch" the whole thing, but
you can't "watch" any of its components? What sort of logic does that
follow? I know that just because you can "drive" a car, it doesn't mean
that you can "drive" its hub-caps; but these building blocks are exactly
the same as the whole - short sections of it.
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
I'm using "watch" in its Concise Oxford Dictionary sense: "keep eyes
fixed on", "keep under observation", "follow observantly".
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-06-14 08:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
[ … ]
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
You still don't get it, do you? Of course you can watch it in slow
motion, because if it's in slow motion it's been recorded, and you can
make a conscious decision to watch it.
--
athel
Harrison Hill
2018-06-14 10:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Harrison Hill
[ … ]
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
You still don't get it, do you? Of course you can watch it in slow
motion, because if it's in slow motion it's been recorded, and you can
make a conscious decision to watch it.
No conscious decision is required under the COD's definition: "keep eyes
fixed on". I can (you seem to be suggesting) "watch" a football match,
with thousands of things happening one after the other, without the need
to "watch" any of those individual things?
Peter T. Daniels
2018-06-14 11:15:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Harrison Hill
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
You still don't get it, do you? Of course you can watch it in slow
motion, because if it's in slow motion it's been recorded, and you can
make a conscious decision to watch it.
No conscious decision is required under the COD's definition: "keep eyes
fixed on". I can (you seem to be suggesting) "watch" a football match,
with thousands of things happening one after the other, without the need
to "watch" any of those individual things?
You can't direct your attention to all those thousands of things.
Harrison Hill
2018-06-14 11:50:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Harrison Hill
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
You still don't get it, do you? Of course you can watch it in slow
motion, because if it's in slow motion it's been recorded, and you can
make a conscious decision to watch it.
No conscious decision is required under the COD's definition: "keep eyes
fixed on". I can (you seem to be suggesting) "watch" a football match,
with thousands of things happening one after the other, without the need
to "watch" any of those individual things?
You can't direct your attention to all those thousands of things.
No need to. Nothing more is required to "watch" something, than to
simply stand there and look at it: "keep eyes fixed on" as the dictionary
puts it. Have you never watched the ocean, or watched the world go by,
or watched your children growing up?
Peter T. Daniels
2018-06-14 13:33:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Harrison Hill
I'll do a navi and see where it is each of you draws the line. How
"I watched the first goal in slow motion"?
You still don't get it, do you? Of course you can watch it in slow
motion, because if it's in slow motion it's been recorded, and you can
make a conscious decision to watch it.
No conscious decision is required under the COD's definition: "keep eyes
fixed on". I can (you seem to be suggesting) "watch" a football match,
with thousands of things happening one after the other, without the need
to "watch" any of those individual things?
You can't direct your attention to all those thousands of things.
No need to. Nothing more is required to "watch" something, than to
simply stand there and look at it: "keep eyes fixed on" as the dictionary
puts it. Have you never watched the ocean, or watched the world go by,
or watched your children growing up?
Those are all quite different from seeing the ocean, the world (what would
"see the world go by" be? you'd have to be in a spacecraft making, say,
the Mars to Venus journey), or the children.

Loading...