Now we return to my original point that ain't is often used in uneducated speech. Which, in my understanding means "An action didn't generated good results of if" I am not is always a claim that a person is not something.
They are quite clearly saying that they are not an idiot (probably in response to someone who has said they are one). Which, in my understanding means "Well, I am declaring myself an idiot"Īin't does indeed expand to am not here, but it certainly doesn't mean that the person thinks they are an idiot. I certainly wouldn't suggest you begin using it in formal contexts. However it is most often used in uneducated speech, so you must be sure to take everything with a grain of salt when you see it used. It is a word, it is technically correct, and it does take the meaning of " not", as you have surmised. I really hope I ain't that confused by the answers.įirst of all, let's be clear that ain't is not commonly used in proper and correct speech. Is it correct to use ain't followed by a no? Does the "no" lose its negation? I really think it means "I am no quitter", but then "ain't" doesn't abbreviate the length of "am", so I don't get the usage of "ain't", or perhaps this phrase ain't a good example, even for an informal contraction like ain't. Which, in my understanding means that "I am a quitter", since the first negation negates the second. This one is a bit weird, but in my understanding means "I am declaring my intentions of crying no more than I already did, today" Which, in my understanding means "I am saying, that I will stop marching" Which, in my understanding means "An action didn't generate good results" Which, in my understanding means "Well, I am declaring myself not an idiot" But I see it used in several ways, some I think of as conflicting. I know its meaning, and also know it is pretty informal.
0 kommentar(er)
