Contractions

Can’t vs. Cannot

Contractions, Devolution toward Simpler, Versus

I heard someone say “can or can’t” during an MP3-based interview this morning.

And it was only because of the context that I could be sure that the interviewee said “can’t” after the conjunction.

This got me to thinking: The popular use of “can’t” instead of “cannot” in spoken American English is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis.

In other words, it is simpler to say the one-syllable “can’t” than the two-syllable form.

But “can’t” can be difficult to hear (to distinguish from “can”).

Recommendation: Be nice to your audience by saying “cannot” instead of “can’t” in interviews, speeches, telephone calls, etc.

“ya’ll”

Apostrophes, Contractions, Pronouns

I saw this in an email message.

Problem:
The apostrophe is in the wrong position.

Explanation:
The complete sentence was “I hope to see ya’ll next year.”

A Texan wrote the email message, and I recognized what the writer intended to say.

But “ya’ll” — spelled Y-A-APOSTROPHE-L-L — is not the correct way to write the contraction for the way that Texans say “you all”, the informal plural of the pronoun “you” in some parts of the United States.

An apostrophe in a contraction indicates where letters have been removed.

No letters have been removed between the “a” and the first “l” in the word “all”.

So the apostrophe does not belong after the “a”.

Instead, the apostrophe belongs where the letters “o” and “u” have been removed from the word “you” in the forming of the contraction.

Solution:
“y’all”

“WERE MOVING OR HAVE MOVED!”

Apostrophes, Contractions, Devolution toward Simpler

My wife spotted this on an envelope.

Problem:
The contraction is missing an apostrophe.

Explanation:
“WERE MOVING OR HAVE MOVED!” was stamped in red beneath a business’s old address in the return-address section of an envelope.

The business obviously had a lot of envelopes that had been printed with its old address in the return-address section, and beneath that section the business had stamped a new message in red to let envelope recipients know one of the following:

  • The business was in the process of moving.
  • The business had already moved.

The new address appeared — also in red — beneath “WERE MOVING OR HAVE MOVED!”, so that envelope recipients would have the new address of the business.

The problem with the red-stamp headline is that it is missing an apostrophe.

When one creates a contraction — in this case from the pronoun “WE” plus the verb “ARE” — an apostrophe must be included to indicate the letter or letters that one has removed to create the contraction.

I believe that the omission of the apostrophe is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to omit an apostrophe than to include one.

Solution:
“WE’RE MOVING OR HAVE MOVED!”