this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2026
685 points (99.0% liked)

Funny

13804 readers
1268 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Horsecook@sh.itjust.works 57 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Who’s to say that ending sentences in contractions is wrong? Perhaps you’d’ve, but I’dn’t’ve.

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 month ago

This made perfect sense

And hurt my head

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 10 points 1 month ago

Cyanide and Happiness: Contractions

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 6 points 1 month ago

Those are all correct and also sound fine.

[–] blueworld@piefed.world 4 points 1 month ago

I prefer Scottish, where they just ignore the punctuation and string it together. isnae = is not. didnae = did not. cannae = cannot.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 667@lemmy.radio 46 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Mac@mander.xyz 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

"It's" specifically is funny because you can use its alternative version "'tis" in some places that you cant use "it's".

[–] Zorcron@piefed.zip 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] bonenode@piefed.social 8 points 1 month ago

Tits what tis.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 42 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Monty Python: It's.

Let me teach you a thing: "have" can be "'ve" if it is an auxiliary verb. Ta-daah.

I can't help you or your fucky language with "'m" or "'s" or "'re".

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 34 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I have an apple - in this sentence, "have" is the main verb.

I have bought an apple - here, "to buy" is the main verb, the main action, while "have" is the auxiliary verb that lets you form the past tense "have bought". The word "auxiliary" means helpful or supportive, an auxiliary verb supports, as it were, the main verb.

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Except you can most certainly say, "I've an apple."

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You can, but would you? It sounds old-timey because it's not how modern English works.

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

lol, really?

I've an apple in one hand, and I've an orange in the other.
I've modernity all over me.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It seems like this usage has survived in British dialects more than elsewhere, I'll give you that.

[–] sik0fewl@piefed.ca 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Texas, too. But having a Texan agree on language probably hurts your argument

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think it might be more common in British English? Like "I've a fiver says he muffs the kick." Or "I've half a mind to go down there myself." (Curiously in American English this latter would probably still have the contraction but add a second auxiliary verb: "I've got half a mind to..." English is such a mess.)

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's not as uncommon the UK to hear specifically "I've [x]" instead of "I've got [x]". I won't be told though that Brits say "the [x] that I've" ;D

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

"I've got" seems particularly strange to me because without the contraction Americans would still just say "I have." (There are some circumstances where they'll say "I have got" without a contraction, but it's mainly when they're drawing a contrast with what they "haven't got." E.g., "No, I don't have a baseball... oh, but I have got a lacrosse ball, will that work?")

I think the rule is probably closer to "you don't contract a stressed verb," but that's not terribly useful since there are so few rules about stress patterns. Verbs at the end of sentences are typically stressed, though, so you're right that ending with that kind of contraction is going to sound wrong to most people.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

In murican that sounds odd.

[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The contractions we say are more loose than what we write. Couldn't've is my go to example.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 7 points 1 month ago

that makes sense, thank you for the explanation!

[–] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So’ve you thought about this before?

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Unfortunately I've studied English at uni thinking it might've in some capacity become useful by now. Alas, so far I've'd no opportunity to use the nonsense I've learnt other than to shitpost about it. Woe'm'st've'd is me.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] KSPAtlas@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

I see "'ve" used in the possessive context, it's not super rare but it's not super common

I think it's more common in some places

"I've no idea what you two are doing" is a valid sentence

[–] MaybeNaught@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Afaik, English grammar requires utterances with predicates to have a stressed element in those predicates. Contractions of only a subject and an auxiliary verb - ex: I am > I'm, he has > he's, they will > they'll - eliminate that independent auxiliary as a prosodic segment and violate that grammar.

A - "Who's going to the store?"

B - "I am." [ok] or "I'm going." [ok] (or "I am going."), but not "I'm." [bad, obvs].

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago

I'm Henry VIII, I'm.

[–] Nooodel@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some times that rule applies, other times it doesn't.

Shall we find a situation that's in the grey zone?

Yeah, let's!

[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago
[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You think it do, but it don't.

[–] 18107@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago

They don't think it be like it is, but it do.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's wrong. Correct would be "doesn't".

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 month ago

Gah! Yes, quite rightn't.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The contraction literally isn't right. It only works with the adverb version of "have".

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This one is correct but sounds wrong because we usually say it the other way.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Well they’re all “correct”. They just don’t sound right. Like saying “the red, big apple” instead of “the big, red apple”.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] bampop@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

If I could add another contraction to that list, I'd

[–] TachyonTele@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

That "it's" is evil. It's going to be in my head for a long time

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

A contraction is a separate word, with its own accepted usages in the community. For example, “gonna” comes from “going to”, but is not the same, as “I’m gonna the shop, do you want anything?” sounds wrong

[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah, "gonna" needs to be followed by a verb for it to sound right, I think, with the exception of it being used as a response affirming they'll be doing an action.
"You gonna go to the store?"
"I'm gonna, just gettin my shoes on first."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JTskulk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Ever since I was a kid, I've had the dumb thought that if you and your friends are imprisoned, you'd ask the warden to "let's out!"

[–] missingno@fedia.io 2 points 1 month ago
[–] Hupf@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago
[–] scutiger@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some folks will never eat a skunk, but then again some folk'll.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›