# FR: tous (ceux) qui/que



## blomst

Bonjour!
Est-ce que c'est possible d'écrire "tous qui" (tous qui ont 18 ans, doivent voter) ou faut-il écrire "tous ceux qui"?
Merci!


----------



## Lucja

Bonjour Blomst,

Ici, on dirait "Tous ceux qui ont 18 ans" 

Ou même mieux : "toutes les personnes agées de 18 ans et plus peuvent voter"


----------



## prambler

Salut!
Vous devez obligatoirement dire:
Toux ceux qui ont 18 ans ...
ou Toutes les personnes âgées de 18 ans./ (à partir de 18 ans)
Mais jamais "tous qui"!


----------



## JAQT

I have been told that "ceux" is required in the context of a sentence like that in the title, such as  "Tous ceux que j'ai vu_s_ étaient contents", which is a made-up sentence, intended to express the thought that "all people I saw were happy; or "Tous ceux que je connais sont contents".

What is the role of "ceux" here?  I had written "Tous que je connais sont contents", completely omitting the word "ceux", thinking that the word "tous" could function by itself as a pronoun.

_Edit: changed "j'ai vu" to "j'ai vu*s*" per helpful comment from snarkhunter_


----------



## snarkhunter

Hello,

In this sentence, "ceux" is a _pronoun substituting a missing noun_. You could not make this sentence "Tous que..." since "tous" is only an _adjective_ here and therefore may not be used as a standalone object, which means you must have either _a noun or a pronoun following_: This is just mandatory!


----------



## JAQT

But why is "tous" only an adjective here?  Why can't it be a standalone object?  This site (see tout - traduction - Dictionnaire Français-Anglais WordReference.com) states that "tout" can function as either an adjective or as a pronoun ("l'ensemble des personnes").

In a similar line of thought, that might give some insight on the answer, what if the sentence were written with "aucun", such as "Aucun celui que je connais ..."  Is "celui" required here or can it be omitted?  Like "tout", this site states that "aucun" can also be either an adjective or a pronoun, see aucun - traduction - Dictionnaire Français-Anglais WordReference.com

Thank you.


----------



## snarkhunter

JAQT said:


> But why is "tous" only an adjective here?


... because it is followed by "ceux", ie. by a pronoun! (... going round in circles, I know!)

[Edit]
One more thing: "tous ceux _que_ j'ai vu*s*"!


----------



## JAQT

snarkhunter said:


> going round in circles, I know!


That's OK: it won't be the first time that, for me at least, the answer seems to be "because that's the way it is" 

Thank you for your help.


----------



## Maître Capello

_Tous_ can indeed also be a pronoun in French, but it must be totally defined. In other words, the exact group of people described by _tous_ must be fully known. In particular, you cannot restrict it with a relative clause, which is the case in your example. In that case you must add the pronoun _ceux_.

_*Ses amis* ont passé une excellente journée. *Tous* étaient contents._  (Here _tous_ is fully defined and refers to _ses amis_.)
_*Ses amis* ont passé une excellente journée. Tous que j'ai vus étaient contents_.  (You cannot use _tous_ as a pronoun because _tous_ does not refer to *all* his friends, but only to the ones you saw.)
_*Ses amis* ont passé une excellente journée. *Tous ceux que* j'ai vus étaient contents_.  (You have to add the pronoun _ceux_.)


----------



## atcheque

Bonjour,

You could use with commas:
_*Tous,* que j'ai vus*,* étaient contents_. (You have seen all of them. They all were happy.)


----------



## Maître Capello

That would sound really odd to me, atcheque… I would never say such a thing. Anyway, in that case it wouldn't be a restrictive clause but a descriptive one.

In short:
_tous ceux que j'ai vus_ = all the ones I saw / all who I saw / everyone I saw → restrictive
_tous*,* que j'ai vus_ = all*,* who I saw → descriptive / nonrestrictive


----------



## JClaudeK

Maître Capello said:


> That would sound really odd to me, atcheque… I would never say such a thing.


Neither would I!


Maître Capello said:


> _Tous_ can indeed also be a pronoun in French, but it must be totally defined. In other words, the exact group of people described by _tous_ must be fully known.


----------



## JAQT

Maître Capello said:


> _Tous_ can indeed also be a pronoun in French, but it must be totally defined. In other words, the exact group of people described by _tous_ must be fully known. In particular, you cannot restrict it with a relative clause, which is the case in your example. In that case you must add the pronoun _ceux_.


This is very helpful, thank you.  I am particularly guided by the distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses (thanks to you too, Maître Capello), and the concept that the exact group described by _tous_ must be fully known before it is permissible to "promote it" (so to speak) from an adjective to a pronoun.


----------



## Swatters

A little dialectal note, a contrario from the thread so far: "Tout qui", but not "tout que" or indeed any other combination of tout and a relative pronoun, is grammatical in Belgian French, and is especially frequent in administrative and legal contexts. For example, an extract from the 04.04.2012 edition of the very serious daily journal _La Libre Belgique_ :

"À ce bureau d’accueil, précisait hier la ministre wallonne de l’Action sociale, Eliane Tillieux (PS), une information sera dispensée au migrant sur les droits et devoirs *de tout qui réside en Belgique*"

From the OP, "Doit voter tout qui a l'âge légal" sounds fine to my ears.

Note the shift from plural to singular once _ceux_ is omitted.


----------



## Oddmania

Intéréssant Swatters, j'ignorais cela.


----------



## JClaudeK

"*tout qui" *est un « _belgicisme _».


> Dans le fr. de Belgique, on emploie fréquemment "tout qui"
> _Laisse entrer tout qui voudra_ (Simenon)
> _Le Bon usage_


En Wallonie, on emploie aussi "tout quoi"


> _Le Bon usage: e_n Wallonie, °tout quoi “ tout ce qui ” (parallèlement à tout qui pour des personnes)


----------

