|
Post by cousinlou on Jan 4, 2021 9:32:58 GMT
You may have noted my signature quote ( From Mark Twain's 'Roughing it' ).
The 'cannot you' makes perfect sense considering we use 'can't you' these days. When and why did it become more acceptable if you don't want to use 'can't' but instead write it full out, to move the 'not' a bit further up in the sentence?
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 10:08:18 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 10:52:05 GMT
Spoken English is a stress-timed language - syllables within words which are stressed are given in full and those unstressed are liable to be contracted. Eg
You can *not* do that - it's out of the question that you have the ability/permission to do that. You can't do *that* - do what you like but not that.
Firstly, I'd say that we're pretty informal, and informality is the norm. So contractions are the norm. "Can not you do that?" is a little formal for modern styles.
Secondly, written forms are usually (pre-email and text) more formal than speech so you'd be less likely to see "can't you" in earlier written forms.
That doesn't really answer the question but I think the answer lies in when informality became the norm of spoken English.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 12:58:49 GMT
It's just about flow of words isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 13:26:07 GMT
That has a lot to do with it, I think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 13:32:17 GMT
The sooner more folk drop the 'm' at the end of 'whom' the better for example. It just causes a pause for no reason when used in the middle of a sentence.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 13:35:09 GMT
There's absolutely no need to use 'whom'.
|
|
|
Post by cousinlou on Jan 4, 2021 13:38:27 GMT
There's absolutely no need to use 'whom'. Hmm, For Who m the Bell Tolls wouldn't have the same ring of solemnity without the 'm'.
|
|
|
Post by cousinlou on Jan 4, 2021 13:40:40 GMT
It's just about flow of words isn't it? Yes, that's more than likely but what interests me is at what point did people decide that ' cannot you act normal' had a lousy flow and ' can you not act normal' is better?
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 13:43:00 GMT
There's absolutely no need to use 'whom'. Hmm, For Who m the Bell Tolls wouldn't have the same ring of solemnity without the 'm'. Of course - but that doesn't contradict what I said!
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 13:44:53 GMT
It's just about flow of words isn't it? Yes, that's more than likely but what interests me is at what point did people decide that ' cannot you act normal' had a lousy flow and ' can you not act normal' is better? what exactly are you asking about? 'can you not act normal?' is different from 'can't you act normal?'. The former is less likely to be used and has a slightly different meaning. Anyway how can you find out when something is not in common use? it's a gradual thing. Did you click on the link? that can help with words or combinations of words.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 13:47:13 GMT
It's just about flow of words isn't it? Yes, that's more than likely but what interests me is at what point did people decide that ' cannot you act normal' had a lousy flow and ' can you not act normal' is better? Lazy kids and working class folk innit. Lack of education and less opportunity or need to speak the proper english, and then it flows upwards.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 13:52:53 GMT
The whole formal/informal or 'proper English' thing is a red herring, I think. We choose easier forms over time. That's what creates change. Language evolves naturally. It's a bottom-up thing.
Nobody would ever answer a 'can you...?' question with 'I cannot'. Not today and not for the last 50 years - whether you're talking to the Queen or your mate. The standard form is 'I can't' - and this has nothing to do with register.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 14:04:25 GMT
I would aruge the more working class, less educated to do quicker and embrace it more without even noticing it.
|
|
|
Post by bungo the mungo on Jan 4, 2021 14:09:40 GMT
I would aruge the more working class, less educated to do quicker and embrace it more without even noticing it. can anyone help with developing this sentence into something coherent?
|
|