I like, saw this, and like totally, like thought of , like this discussion!
http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/200 ... =500&h=375
Lauguage that irritates you
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
I just said amn't like 30 times out loud, trying to make it sound like a contraction of am and not. I still don't know if I'm saying it right. And my cat is looking at me strangely.
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
"Amn't" (I pronounce it "amint," i.e., "am" and "int," though the i is really a schwa, of course) should make a comeback. It makes much more sense than "aren't": after all, does one say, "I are not hungry at the moment"? Usually, anyway?
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
Well no, but I wouldn't say "I aren't hungry at the moment" either. I'd say "I'm not hungry at the moment". Still a contraction of "I am not", just in a different form.Sarah wrote:after all, does one say, "I are not hungry at the moment"? Usually, anyway?
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
Yay!Sarah wrote:
P.S. I like the typo in your subject line.
Ten poits!
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
lolhaha u suk!Ghost wrote:I want a haunted car! How do I get one???
BTW, there's a typo in your subject line too.
Damn, there's one in mine too!
Re: Lauguage that irritates you
True. It was a bad example. Aren't I blushing now!Gandalf wrote:Well no, but I wouldn't say "I aren't hungry at the moment" either. I'd say "I'm not hungry at the moment". Still a contraction of "I am not", just in a different form.