Am so not ... ever again

Question

Is this an example of present tense for future context?

I hate her. I am so not speaking to her ever again.

If someone speaks the sentence above does it have the implication below:

I hate her so I am so not speaking to her ever again (if/when I see her)

Thanks.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

The speech is a CURRENTLY FASHIONABLE and affected style of speech amongst the young.You are correct in your interpretation.

RandomGuy · Answer

cephIs this an example of present tense for future context?

You could say that.

cephIf someone speaks the sentence above does it have the implication below:
I hate her so I am so not speaking to her ever again (if/when I see her)

Yes, the two are pretty much the same in meaning.

BarbaraPA · Answer

No, that's not right.

"So I am not speaking to her" uses "so" as a conjunction. I hate her. I'm not speaking to her ever again. I hate her, so I'm not... shows you the connection.

When "so" is used the way it was in your original, it's an idiomatic (colloquial and no doubt non-standard, albeit common) use emphasizing your determination to follow through on your course of action, or just emphasis in general.

My mother says I can't go to that party. Oh, I am SO going. I may get in trouble, but I'm going.
I'm ugly! // Oh give me a break! You are so not ugly. One zit does not affect how gorgeous you are.
I can't believe she said that to you. I am so telling her off the next time I see her.

I don't recommend you copy this style in your writing, but you will hear it quite a bit in the US, especially from younger females.

RandomGuy · Answer

Grammar GeekNo, that's not right.
"So I am not speaking to her" uses "so" as a conjunction. I hate her. I'm not speaking to her ever again. I hate her, so I'm not... shows you the connection.

I hate her. I am so not speaking to her ever again.
I hate her, so I am so not speaking to her ever again

I see no notable difference here. Without the conjunction, so, any sensible person would register the connection between the two sentences. Why else would he never speak to her ever again?

The way I see it is that so's function (in this case) is merely to join the two clauses together. The meaning is clear either way.

Grammar GeekI don't recommend you copy this style in your writing, but you will hear it quite a bit in the US, especially from younger females.

I find this objection surprising, considering that you are all for He was like, …, etc., which is very similar in nature.

She was like, "Yeah, let's do it."
And I was like, "I'm so there!"

BarbaraPA · Answer

I can only say it again. The "so" in the orignal adds empahsis to the speaker's determination. It is NOT a conjunction.

It's the same "so" as in "You are so not ugly" or "I am so going to that party." It's empathic.

It's not standard English, but it's colloquial.

The "noticable difference" is the emphasis. That type of "so" does not need to be tied to a prior statement so show cause can effect.

RandomGuy · Answer

Grammar GeekI can only say it again. The "so" in the orignal adds empahsis to the speaker's determination. It is NOT a conjunction.
It's the same "so" as in "You are so not ugly" or "I am so going to that party." It's empathic.
It's not standard English, but it's colloquial.
The "noticable difference" is the emphasis. That type of "so" does not need to be tied to a prior statement so show cause can effect.

Sorry, I don't think we're on the same page.

I was referring to the conjunction so in the second example, and both of them contain an emphatic so.

By the way, I edited my post.

BarbaraPA · Answer

Ah. I think you and I are on the same page now. Sorry about that.

However, the original poster needs to realize that the use of "so" (I am so not...) is a non-standard way of expressing emphasis, and hopefully by now that message has gotten through.

Am so not ... ever again

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions