TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: shall & will From:Virginia Krenn <asdxvlk -at- OKWAY -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU> Date:Fri, 3 Jun 1994 14:58:23 CDT
This message brings to mind a recent posting that commented on the
usage of ain't. That posting caused me to wonder if its origin was as
a contraction of am not as opposed to are not and, if so, why it fell
into disrepute. Anyone know?
You are not -- You are n't -- You aren't
I am not -- I am n't -- I amn't (difficult to pronounce,so) -- I ain't