3

Possible Duplicate:
Can a word be contracted twice (e.g. “I'ven't”)?

I would like to know if it is proper to chain multiple contractions into a single word when they are in a continuous string.

For example: "They are not ants." You have the choices: "They're not ants." and "They aren't ants." How about: "They'ren't ants."

If this case doesn't suit your fancy, feel free to suggest a more appropriate example.

Community
  • 1
ggentzke
  • 131
  • 2
    No, that's never possible. – James Moore Dec 02 '11 at 20:40
  • And related: Contracting "Should not have" – yoozer8 Dec 02 '11 at 20:40
  • I've heard 'tisn't – Daniel Dec 02 '11 at 20:43
  • @Jim looks like you're right. – ggentzke Dec 02 '11 at 20:47
  • @Daniel: "It is!", "it isn't!", "'tis!", "'tin't". You hear all sorts of things, such as "wyn-cha [fuck off!]" for "why don't you..." But we don't normally write them. – FumbleFingers Dec 02 '11 at 21:03
  • @FumbleFingers Exactly. These are spoken only contractions, like "hafta" for "have to". They are never written except when trying to indicate the way a particular person talks. – David Schwartz Dec 03 '11 at 00:39
  • @David Schwartz: Some, like can't and it's, are effectively standard written forms, though still a bit informal. Others, like hafta and oughta are almost exclusively reserved for reported speech - "loose" speech at that. I think OP is asking how far he can go with written contractions. But I doubt that's because he often hears people say They'ren't, and wants to represent this accurately in reported speech. – FumbleFingers Dec 03 '11 at 03:59
  • @FumbleFingers I disagree that it's "loose" speech. In fact, I would argue that "I have to go to the store" is awkward unless pronounced "hafta" (and almost no native speaker of English would ever say that). Similarly, "You don't need to go to the store but I have to" is simply incorrect if pronounced "hafta". – David Schwartz Dec 04 '11 at 00:02
  • @David Schwartz: The representation hafta can be misleading - what matters is that the "v" always changes to "f" in the obligation sense. It's "loose speech" to enunciate "to" with a schwa (neutral vowel), but we never actually write "hafto" as a way of indicating the obligation meaning. – FumbleFingers Dec 04 '11 at 14:37
  • @FumbleFingers I'm specifically interested in the legality of chained contractions, as opposed to whether one should or should not write them. – ggentzke Dec 13 '11 at 01:43
  • There's no clear-cut authority ruling on the "legality" of even written forms, let alone spoken ones. Teenagers in particular seem prone to mumble and slur, to the exasperation of their parents. It's never going to be possible to stop this somewhat lamentable habit, but I think the best advice for you would be to only reproduce in speech what you often see in writing. Making up your own "abbreviated forms" isn't really a good idea. – FumbleFingers Dec 13 '11 at 03:06

0 Answers0