I like grammar as much as the next future educator. However, on occasion, I choose to reject the rules of the English language. For example, I think that "funnest" is a perfectly acceptable way to express the superlative form of fun. By all rules of phonics, it makes sense. I will not go deeper into that particular arguement, except by personal request.
Sometimes, I even pronounce silent letters that I feel are undervalued.
One word I simply do not understand is the contraction "won't." Contractions are already hard enough to understand (as made evident by the Great Your v. You're Confusion). There is simply no logical way to put will and not together and to get won't on the flipside of the equation. But English speakers, we don't care. We just put an apostrophe where the o of not is missing and go on with life, as if that was the most perplexing part of the word.
It is not.
Will to wo is perplexing. I would even say unsettling.
Henceforth I resolve to use the word willn't (except when I forget, which will probably be the majority of the time). And fret not, my pretties, in the future, I will try to keep the grammar posts to a minimum.
Sometimes, I even pronounce silent letters that I feel are undervalued.
One word I simply do not understand is the contraction "won't." Contractions are already hard enough to understand (as made evident by the Great Your v. You're Confusion). There is simply no logical way to put will and not together and to get won't on the flipside of the equation. But English speakers, we don't care. We just put an apostrophe where the o of not is missing and go on with life, as if that was the most perplexing part of the word.
It is not.
Will to wo is perplexing. I would even say unsettling.
Henceforth I resolve to use the word willn't (except when I forget, which will probably be the majority of the time). And fret not, my pretties, in the future, I will try to keep the grammar posts to a minimum.
No comments:
Post a Comment