She has made us all something to eat.

To me, it has two meanings...

a) She assisted us all to eat something (like the mother made her kid study). OR
b) For everyone, she has made something to eat

The question rose as I read that "we can put all after pronouns used as objects."

2 Answers 2


something to eat is the direct object of your sentence (us being the indirect object, you can replace it with for us).

For that reason, your version a) does not work in this sentence.

If that were the meaning, the sentence should have been:

She has made us all eat something.

So, yes, you can put all after a pronoun used as an object. In this case, it is put after the indirect object of the sentence. The sentence would become ambiguous by putting all in between the indirect and the direct object if "all something to eat" would make any sense. But it doesn't, so we parse the sentence as:

She / has made / us all / something to eat.

Simply because parsing it like:

She / has made / us / all something to eat.

Makes our head spin, trying to combine "all" and "something" to "eat".


I think in this context the correct meaning is b).

The first meaning would be if the statement was "She made us eat." or something along those lines.

Adding the "something" makes it so that the statement regards her giving something to you.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .