#1  
Old 22-May-2006, 17:33
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 27
Default Ain't

1) What is it short for?
2) How is it spelt? Ain't or aint :P
Thanks
  #2  
Old 22-May-2006, 17:48
Ouisch's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,140
Home Country: United States
Native Language: English
Current Location: United States
Member Type: English Teacher
Default Re: Ain't

It's short for either "am not" or "are not", depending upon the context. Correct spelling is "ain't."

And, of course, despite its very common and frequent usage, it's still considered incorrect grammar.
  #3  
Old 22-May-2006, 17:55
Newbie
Threadstarter  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 27
Default Re: Ain't

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ouisch
It's short for either "am not" or "are not", depending upon the context. Correct spelling is "ain't."
And, of course, despite its very common and frequent usage, it's still considered incorrect grammar.
How about 'is not', 'have not' and 'has not'?
  #4  
Old 22-May-2006, 18:45
matilda's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 849
Member Type: English Teacher
Talking Re: Ain't

ain't is the short form of BE+NOT
and i'm not sure if it can be used instead of HAVE/HAS+NOT
but it is not grammatically correct.
  #5  
Old 23-May-2006, 03:36
Editor, UsingEnglish.com
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 34,371
Home Country: UK
Native Language: British English
Current Location: Philippines
Member Type: English Teacher
Default Re: Ain't

It can be used for all persons of be (I ain't going, you ain't going, etc) and for have/has (I ain't done it, he ain't done it, etc).
  #6  
Old 23-May-2006, 13:53
matilda's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 849
Member Type: English Teacher
Talking Re: Ain't

dear tdol

this post DOESN'T mean that you are not right. but one of my teachers told me that we CAN NOT use ain't instead of have/has. does this site have a forum mentioning this rule?

thanks
Matilda
  #7  
Old 24-May-2006, 04:54
Editor, UsingEnglish.com
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 34,371
Home Country: UK
Native Language: British English
Current Location: Philippines
Member Type: English Teacher
Default Re: Ain't

If you have a look at these Google results, you'll see that ain't + past participle, many of which will be replacements for 'have' is common, and used in British and American English:

http://www.google.com/search?hs=Pvj&...22&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hs=cvj&...22&btnG=Search
(Try scrolling through some of the back pages away from the first page)
  #8  
Old 24-May-2006, 06:56
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,971
Member Type: Other
Default Re: Ain't

Quote:
Originally Posted by matilda
... one of my teachers told me that we CAN NOT use ain't instead of have/has.
Here are two utterances I have said:

"ain't" instead of "haven't"
EX: I ain't seen you in a while. <I haven't seen you in a while.>

"ain't" instead of "don't"
EX: They ain't got my size. <They don't have my size.>


In addition,

From Take Our Word For IT
http://www.takeourword.com/arc_logi.html#ain't
[ain't] has also been used, since 1845, to mean `have not' and `has not.'

From Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=ain't
Main Entry: ain't
1 : am not : are not : is not
2 : have not : has not
3 : do not : does not : did not

Hope that helps.
  #9  
Old 25-May-2006, 03:23
Editor, UsingEnglish.com
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 34,371
Home Country: UK
Native Language: British English
Current Location: Philippines
Member Type: English Teacher
Default Re: Ain't

Given that it's a non-standard form, it shouldn't really be expected to behave according to the rules.
  #10  
Old 25-May-2006, 15:25
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,971
Member Type: Other
Default Re: Ain't

Oh, but ... it follows. It follows. It's a generic contraction that regularized, starting with 1st person singular BE, then 2nd and 3rd, then all persons and numbers BE, then moved on to the other two major auxiliaries, HAVE and DO.

ain't
1706, originally a contraction of am not, and in proper use with that sense until it began to be used as a generic contraction for are not, is not, etc., in early 19c. Cockney dialect of London, popularized by representations of this in Dickens, etc., which led to the word being banished from correct English.

Source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?...earchmode=none
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
aint


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 21:32.



Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.