It sound like the tutorial is saying

if you want to you can go ahead and put in all your bottoms and then put in all your tops

I guess "put in all" is easy to understand in everyday speech.

The question is, is that grammatic for written english?

  • For me, this is more of a colloquial talk. I wouldn't write something down the way he has said it, however, I know exactly what he's saying. Grammatically I believe it would be incorrect.
    – Matthew
    Jan 31, 2020 at 22:21
  • 1
    The grammar is fine, but there isn't really a phrase "put in all", per se. It breaks down to "(put in) = verb phrase (all your tops) = noun phrase". So because you can "put in" any noun phrase, and because "all your tops" is a valid noun phrase, the overall construction is acceptable. Jan 31, 2020 at 22:24
  • I don't see a problem if this is an instruction for washing bikinis.
    – user105719
    Feb 1, 2020 at 0:12
  • @Matthew Thanks for your comments. Would you please write that content down in your style to give me some inspiration?
    – zghqh
    Feb 1, 2020 at 0:16

1 Answer 1


The video is about building a framework that includes pieces of wood along the bottom of the intended structure ('bottoms') and pieces of wood along the top ('tops').

Both the tops and the bottoms need to be incorporated into the structure ('put in' - a perfectly grammatical term).

The speaker is saying that you can do that for the bottoms and then for the tops.

None of what he says is colloquial. It is certainly not ungrammatical. You just have to understand that 'bottoms' and 'tops' refer to pieces of wood at the bottom or top respectively of the intended structure.

You must log in to answer this question.

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