The Independence of Contractions [electronic resource] / Eugene V. Mohr.
This paper considers such contracted forms as "I'm,""he's,""we'd," and "isn't" or "won't." It is often assumed, the author states, that every contracted form is derived by surface-level phonological rules from a non-contracte...
Saved in:
| Online Access: |
Full Text (via ERIC) |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic eBook |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[S.l.] :
Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
1969.
|
| Subjects: |
| Summary: | This paper considers such contracted forms as "I'm,""he's,""we'd," and "isn't" or "won't." It is often assumed, the author states, that every contracted form is derived by surface-level phonological rules from a non-contracted and semantically equivalent counterpart. The author presents evidence to suggest that these assumptions are not justified and that, in fact, "contractions and their related uncontracted counterparts may have different derivational histories, different semantic contents, and different syntactic functions." It is also suggested that "contractions may really be the underlying forms of the language from which the uncontracted forms are derived and that many common opinions about and attitudes toward contractions are traceable to orthographic conventions." (JD) |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | ERIC Document Number: ED030090. ERIC Note: Paper presented at the Third Annual TESOL Convention, Chicago, Illinois, March 5-8, 1969. |
| Physical Description: | 8 p. |