Who’s to say that ending sentences in contractions is wrong? Perhaps you’d’ve, but I’dn’t’ve.
this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2026
686 points (99.0% liked)
Funny
14677 readers
186 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This made perfect sense
And hurt my head
Cyanide and Happiness: Contractions
Those are all correct and also sound fine.
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)
It’s what it’s.
"It's" specifically is funny because you can use its alternative version "'tis" in some places that you cant use "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".
what's an auxillary verb?
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.
Except you can most certainly say, "I've an apple."
You can, but would you? It sounds old-timey because it's not how modern English works.
lol, really?
I've an apple in one hand, and I've an orange in the other.
I've modernity all over me.
It seems like this usage has survived in British dialects more than elsewhere, I'll give you that.
Canada, too.
Texas, too. But having a Texan agree on language probably hurts your argument
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.)
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
"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.
In murican that sounds odd.
The contractions we say are more loose than what we write. Couldn't've is my go to example.
load more comments
(1 replies)
that makes sense, thank you for the explanation!
So’ve you thought about this before?
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)
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
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].
I'm Henry VIII, I'm.
Some times that rule applies, other times it doesn't.
Shall we find a situation that's in the grey zone?
Yeah, let's!
You think it do, but it don't.
They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
That's wrong. Correct would be "doesn't".
Gah! Yes, quite rightn't.
The contraction literally isn't right. It only works with the adverb version of "have".
it's what it's
This one is correct but sounds wrong because we usually say it the other way.
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)
If I could add another contraction to that list, I'd
That "it's" is evil. It's going to be in my head for a long time
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
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)
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!"
view more: next ›