2007-03-04 13:49:22 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
1) At one time it worked like this
.................FULL FORM > CONTRACTION
SINGULAR
First person: I am not > I ain't
Second person: you are not > you aren't
Third person: he/she/it is not > he.... isn't
ALL PLURALS: we/you/they are not > we...aren't
Note that this was long considered totally acceptable, including "ain't" (though ONLY for the 'first person singular' form "I ain't"). So it was --and is-- a 'real word'!
Later "ain't" came to be used, at least in some dialects, as a substitute for ALL the contracted forms (that is, not just for "am not", but in place of isn't and aren't as well). It may be that this had something to do with to this form falling into disfavor as sloppy or substandard.
Perhaps an even greater factor in this form coming to be thought 'substandard, was its widespread use in Cockney English. This was very evident in the popular writings of Charles Dickens. . . and it may be that this led to or cemented to notion that only the uneducated spoke this way. Hence "ain't" came to be banned from "standard English".
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=ain%27t
Unfortunately, this all leaves us with an awkward hole in speaking. We can say "You're coming, aren't you?" or "Isn't he home yet?" But what do you do for such sentences with "I"?
* "am I not" is considered stuffy
* "aren't I?" is sometimes used, but that doesn't seem quite right, "are/are not" does not go with "I" !
In 'standard' colloquial speech (at least American English), "aren't" is more likely to be used -- to avoid the awkward "am I not" and the "ain't" we've been taught is wrong/uneducated (or even, 'not a word'). Or else we find some way to avoid using any form of "to be". Frankly, I have no objection to "ain't I?" or even, in certain expressions where a 'folksy' expression seems called for, "Ain't it?"
2007-03-04 23:10:10 · answer #1 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the slang way of saying "isn't it"?
It's improper and shouldn't be used in formal papers, etc. You'll hear a lot of kids saying it out loud though.
I hope that helps you :)
2007-03-04 21:51:58 · answer #2 · answered by MrsZZD 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
am not---
like-- i am not bad
i ain't bad
but nowadays it is used as a slang for other short forms but it is wrong.
i aint got tha habit of using it as slang...
2007-03-05 04:16:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
wikipedia--
Ain't is a contraction originally for "am not" and "are not", but now typically meaning "is not", "am not", "are not", "has not", or "have not". In some dialects it is also used as a contraction of "do not", "does not", and "did not", as in I ain't know that. The word is a perennial issue in English usage.
2007-03-04 21:52:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I believe that, based on the context and the subject used, it can be "is not" "am not" or "are not". Of course, it's completely improper English, but I'm guessing you knew that.
2007-03-04 21:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by Andre@ L 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is considered sub-standard usage of the word "not" or "is not" depending on the context. For example: " I ain't doing that." means " I'm not doing that." Or: " That ain't right." means, " That is not right."
2007-03-04 21:52:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not a word. But I am assuming it means are not, or am not
2007-03-04 21:51:50 · answer #7 · answered by Whitney S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's slang for isn't
2007-03-04 21:54:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is not a legitimate word to begin with. most people feel it means doesn't it corresponds to it.
2007-03-04 21:53:48 · answer #9 · answered by cadaholic 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
is not
I know this might sound funny, but if you think you could give me the best answer, i would apprecaite it. I really need the points. Thanks!
2007-03-04 21:52:07 · answer #10 · answered by xoxo 03 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋