AINT! Oh ya lets say "am not" everytime!

How isnt there a word for this one combination of words, "am not"?

Yet AINT, a word just for that, was ridiculed and repressed (for how many years?) by Webster et al.

Definitely have time to be saying two separate words, two syllables, every time all day I ain't gonna do something. I got stuff to do! I ain't got time. Time we cant get back. But Webster, he says no. Instead of streamline our thinking, we gotta process two words to say one.

How many more of these are there? Our language is so super sophisticated we had better marvel in its magnificence. Like having two spelling of the same word, and perhaps 4 or more potentially wildly different meanings for them.

Yes! We arguably have the most ergonomic way to spell out and ultimately therefore express ourselves, but then it has these backwards quirks. we'll call them.

WONT. Now wont is okay, isnt it?

Here's one I enjoy, you all is for southerners "ya'll". And I actually get it. And they do too, right until I ask if you all is ya'll, then wouldnt we all be wa'll? And in my experience, they dont like that one.

Aren't vs. are not.

Why would you have two words to express one action? To even express that an 'action' even occurred?

Somethings not right here. I'm picturing a graph... a line... with a big horseshoe curve. Ultimately they just touch and become the same thing (backwardsness). On the one hand, stick too long to the words of the past, and you stay stuck on (whatever there be) stupid. But you can go all out and slang your way to some 'something', but it too just gets stupid.

LOL.

I know, I'm cray cray!

Oh dear, those two are actually fun to say. Poor Webster, how has he managed this yikes of a grammatical ratio all these years?

Webster, give us a better word for ain't, or you ain't worth linguistic salt. Seriously, it smacks of some petty power tyrant crap. Where after all, written language from it onset, was designed as a tool of control. And in todays world, the domination system that too rides on the wave of language to manipulate and control us all, half of its whole angle is just wasting our precious time.

Perhaps tedious for all time Webster here, helped craft this model. Jinkies!

a reply to: godsovein

What about "I'm not".

Best of all worlds.

You don't like that for some reasom?

a reply to: godsovein

My favorite is J'ous. Or Tol j'ous

"I tol j'ous not to do that".

Jawn is also very flexible. Mostly a Philly area slang term.

I pissed off my niece last week explaining the importance of grammar in communication to her.

She wasn't interested in hearing it though.

www.englishclub.com...

I use most of these in speech.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: godsovein
Jawn is also very flexible. Mostly a Philly area slang term.

I pissed off my niece last week explaining the importance of grammar in communication to her.

She wasn't interested in hearing it though.

But jawn she wanna learn better grammar?

Okay, done editing, well I had a couple more but had to skip. How could I not make sure the Grammar Nazi's dont get to have their fun too?

Or are we not supposed to be inclusive to them? Everyone gets a taste, rigt?

a reply to: godsovein

You're in luck... Modern Dictionaries agree with you...I think This is no longer an issue. It's officially a word.

Congratulations! You were on the right side of the very important issue.

And that Ain't no joke neither.

For someone who don't have the time to Ergonomics, you certainly have the time to discuss Ergonomics of a word or phrase on ATS!

a reply to: Infinitis

What year do you identify with?

Where i'm from I'm still a ruffian for talking like this.

a reply to: godsovein

I realize this is a myopic view of language; English in particular. What I find strange are languages which are tonal. some of the old languages of earth have one word that can mean 5 or more different meanings simply by how the word is said. Mandarin Chinese is supposed to have two tones ie one word two different meanings depending on the tone used. Thai has 5 meanings for each word. Is as if back in the day they could not come up with different sounds and even today they have a problem with many Engligh words as they are not used to making the English sounds.

"L" sounds, Honolulu in Japanese national speakers comes out Honoruru that is one reason during WW2 Honolulu was used as a spoken code pass word.... I will say this about the English language as it provides many different sounds that others can not emulate. Context does play a part in any language. Next week what are you doing or today I feel weak; plenty of examples like that...... now imagine week meaning 5 different things depending on if a flat tone, a rising tone, a descending tone, a short tone, or a long tone.....

It is what it is.... and until one learns and speaks another language or two it is hard to appreciate what the English language can do in a simplified descriptive manner.

No language is perfect, but as long as you can get your meaning across, then, unless you are a grammar Nazi, I think it is better than sign language in most instances unless you are in a fox hole in a war zone..

originally posted by: 727Sky
What I find strange are languages which are tonal. some of the old languages of eart have one word that can mean 5 or more different meanings simply by how the word is said.

originally posted by: godsovein

How isnt there a word for this one combination of words, "am not"?

Yet AINT, a word just for that, was ridiculed and repressed (for how many years?) by Webster et al.

If I recall my entomology correctly ...

There was a professor at some prestigious university that would not tolerate contractions. If you turned in a paper, or even spoken, you used "you are" and not "you're" or you would get dinged for it. In protest, some students got together and decided to create a new word, "ain't."

Since it was a new word and not a contraction, they used it as often as possible, much to the aggravation of the professor. The word became very popular with students, but not the professor, the university, or the dictionary.

I don't know if this is accurate or not. Just something I read a long time ago. But, at least "ain't" has lasted longer than "groovy", "jive", or "beat."

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
For someone who don't have the time to Ergonomics, you certainly have the time to discuss Ergonomics of a word or phrase on ATS!

"You keep using that word. I don thin it means what you thin it means."

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Phhfst.

YOu're interjectionisms herein are not ergonomic to the groovy beat of this jive.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
For someone who don't have the time to Ergonomics, you certainly have the time to discuss Ergonomics of a word or phrase on ATS!

"You keep using that word. I don thin it means what you thin it means."

Ergonomics in this contexts simply means convenience.

a reply to: godsovein

Uhhhh ...

Yo Mama!

(I still got it!)

a reply to: godsovein

You are out of date and Webster's has nothing to do with it. Aint officially became a word when Bill Clinton used it while he was president. That is what counts, just like OK.

originally posted by: shaneslaughta

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
For someone who don't have the time to Ergonomics, you certainly have the time to discuss Ergonomics of a word or phrase on ATS!

"You keep using that word. I don thin it means what you thin it means."

Ergonomics in this contexts simply means convenience.

I thought ergonomics was the study of maximizing devices to better accommodate the human form. I guess in a way that does apply. I just assumed you were going to something closer to Eubonics.

a reply to: shaneslaughta

Well yeah, Inconveniencing my affairs makes you very unergonomical.

Which come to think of it, thats the great challenge of our time. Getting everyone out of antiergonomical radicalism. So first we'll start wih taking out all the Grammar Nazi's!