this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
19 points (91.3% liked)

English usage and grammar

371 readers
1 users here now

A community to discuss and ask questions about English usage and grammar.

If your post refers to a specific English variant, please indicate it within square brackets (for instance [Canadian]).

Online resources:

Sibling communities:

Rules of conduct:

The usual ones on Lemmy and Mastodon.. In short: be kind or at least respectful, no offensive language, no harassment, no spam.

(Icon: entry "English" in the Oxford English Dictionary, 1933. Banner: page from Chaucer's "The Wife of Bath's Tale".)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
19
Can "n't " and " + [pronoun]" be used with any verb? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

When I first learnt English, I thought this type of formulation only worked with a few verbs like "do", "have","should" (ex: "Should I do this? No, I shouldn't.")

More recently I also encountered "Need I?" and "needn't", tho they're more rarely used. But this got me wondering, is it still an exceptional construction, with "need" being one of the exceptions, or can it be done with every verbs? For example, are the following sentences correct:

  • Read you mangas? No, I readn't them.
  • Grow they potatoes? No, they grown't these.
  • Sounds it like a good idea? No, it soundsn't.

I know talking like this would raise a few eyebrows, but does it break any established rule?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I think it's customary to only use it with certain verbs, mainly ones that are also helping verbs (do, can, should, will). And all the sentences you use as examples can be rewritten to use do, e.g. "No, I don't read them."

Will becomes won't for its contraction, but you would never hear it used when it's not a helping verb, e.g. "The psychokinetics will the object to move" word never become "The psychokinetics won't the object to move" because that's not where the not word be in the sentence, whereas "The psychokinetic will move the object with her mind" readily is negated to "The psychokinetic won't move..." because that's the normal place for a not in the sentence.

"Need to" is almost a helping verb sometimes when it acts like must, like "I need to wash my hands" -> "I needn't wash my hands" Or the more common "I don't need to wash my hands"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's not clear if you did this intentionally or not but the "will" used in your example "The psychokinetics will the object to move" is not the same kind of "will" used in your other examples, it's this one meaning "to create using the power of your mind".

It's a bit of a nitpick but I thought it worth mentioning as OP seems to be trying to learn.

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It was intentional, to point out a use that's not a helping verb.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Ah ok fair enough, I just found it confusing because the two have the same spelling but completely different meanings and uses.

In the first context it's kind of synonymous with "wish" right? So implying that anyone would replace the will (as in willpower/willed etc) with "won't" in that example is a bit confusing, because that would never happen. In the same way you'd never replace "wish" with "won't".

Edit: just wanted to say I have zero education in this area, I'm just a native speaker, but I love reading these threads when they come up as it helps me understand more about the language too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Thank you that's a good explanation!