|
|
Post by cousinlou on Jan 4, 2021 14:14:54 GMT
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. Yes I clicked the link but if anything, it made me more confused. Twain may have used the 'cannot' for comedy effect. If you were not allowed to use contractions, how would you rewrite 'can't you act normal' and maintain the same meaning? |
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Jan 4, 2021 14:20:15 GMT
"Is it not possible for you to....?" 🙂
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 14:29:26 GMT
Hmm, For Who m the Bell Tolls wouldn't have the same ring of solemnity without the 'm'. Never mind solemnity, it would just sound wrong. Americans get it right more than the Brits, too. Thin end of the wedge. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 14:32:46 GMT
I'm bowing out of this one - I could make the case for language nuance and precision and other things deemed 'unimportant' but there's no point here.
|
|
