Omniglot forum • View topic

Anders · Joined:Wed 20 May 2009 10:23 am Posts:52 Location: Sweden

We still have no forum for Q.s about English so I post here.

What is the difference between it's not and it isn't?

Maybe we should introduse it'sn't

dtp883 · **Posted:** Thu 02 Jul 2009 7:15 pm

The only difference is where you want to contract the words. I don't think it'sn't would catch on where I live. But I know a bunch of people who use shouldn't've couldn't've and wouldn't've because that's how they say it when talking.

linguoboy · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 9:02 am Posts:1002

Anders wrote:

What is the difference between it's not and it isn't?

Emphasis. Isn't is neutral whereas 's not put emphasis on the negation.

Quote:

Maybe we should introduse it'sn't ;)

You couldn't; it violates the prosodic rules of English negation.

dreaminjosh · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 5:06 am Posts:19

dtp883 wrote:

The only difference is where you want to contract the words. I don't think it'sn't would catch on where I live. But I know a bunch of people who use shouldn't've couldn't've and wouldn't've because that's how they say it when talking.

I'm one of those people. Well, kind of... Whenever I say those, in rapid speech, they usually come out "shouldn'a, wouldn'a, and couldn'a". I think it's because I live in the South. Though my accent is fairly neutral, depending on who I'm around it tends to slide into a drawl. Especially now that I work in Gastonia. People there actually pronounce the word "light", "lat" (or something closer to that).

Declan · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 6:51 am Posts:122

linguoboy wrote:

You couldn't; it violates the prosodic rules of English negation.

Yes, in my dialect at least, it's not a possible contraction.

dreaminjosh · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 5:06 am Posts:19

Declan wrote:

linguoboy wrote:

You couldn't; it violates the prosodic rules of English negation.

Yes, in my dialect at least, it's not a possible contraction.

I don't think it's possible in any. It's really awkward to say, too.

linguoboy · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 9:02 am Posts:1002

dreaminjosh wrote:

I don't think it's possible in any.

This was the conclusion Zwicky and Pullum came to more than twenty-five years ago when they examined its behaviour in detail and determined that it was an inflectional ending rather than a clitic. I haven't seen anything since then to persuade me otherwise.

Stosis · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 11:32 am Posts:71

linguoboy wrote:

dreaminjosh wrote:

I don't think it's possible in any.

This was the conclusion Zwicky and Pullum came to more than twenty-five years ago when they examined its behaviour in detail and determined that it was an inflectional ending rather than a clitic. I haven't seen anything since then to persuade me otherwise.

Can you post a link or a reference? I'm intrigued.

linguoboy · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 9:02 am Posts:1002

The reference is "Zwicky & Pullum on clitics and inflections" (Language, 1983). Arnold Zwicky has a link to the PDF on his homepage.

Anders · Joined:Wed 20 May 2009 10:23 am Posts:52 Location: Sweden

How does it sound to you natives to make a contraction like this:

No, you mayn't. (= may not)

There is another thing I wonder. Would a regular anglophone understand this:

What does it be? (= 'What is it', expressed with do-support as English use to use to construct questions)

How does it sound to you if one doesn't make do-support at verbs that usually have them when asking questions? Is it understandable for a regular anglophone? For example:

Understand you? (= Do you understand)
What play you? (= What do you play)

I mean, this wordorder is normal with some verb: is it?, How could you?? So, the two examples fit in that system.