Re: should've (was: Re: x > f sound change)

Nik Taylor wrote:

>Does anyone say /Sudv/?  I've never heard it without a schwa, in fact,
>the /v/ often gets dropped in my experience.  At any rate, if asked to
>clearly repeat what I said, I would also say /aj Sud d@nt t@v gAn/, and
>likely not /aj Sud nAt h&v gAn/.  I don't see the use of the contraction
>in emphatic or clear speach as that odd.
I do, actually. The problem here is that "-n't" is historically a
contraction, but not synchronically. The clitic "-n't" and the word "not"
have diverged to the point of being distinct elements in the English
lexicon. They don't behave the same any longer. Note the following
contrast. You invert "-n't" along with a verb in questions, but you do not
do that with "not".

Didn't he go?
*Did not he go?

Furthermore, contractions cannot be used before a "gap" while "-n't" can.

Who will do this for me?
I'll do it. / I will. / *I'll.

Who can do this for me.
I can't do it. / I can't.

Applying the same tests, though, we find that "-'ve" is neither fish nor
fowl. It does not invert (unlike "-n't"), but it does occur before gaps
(unlike contractions).

Should he of gone?
*Should of he gone?

Who should have done it?
I should've.



Marcus Smith

Unfortunately, or luckily,
no language is tyrannically consistent.
All grammars leak.
                -- Edward Sapir