Amn't

There is no English contraction for "am not."

"amn't" isn't a word; "ain't" is universally recognized as illiterate; "aren't I" is in common usage although no fluent speaker of English would expand it to "I are not."

I’m correct, aren’t I?

This is correct. There is no violation of any rule here: in your sentence aren’t is not a contraction of are not, but an irregular (negative) form of am.

Here’s a recent reply by fivejedjon on the issue:

Am is one of several verbs th

Sorry, A-Gus, I ain't buyin' it. Maybe it's the hour, but a contraction is the written form of an elision. I'm guessing that we don't have "amn't" because two adjacent nasal phonemes are hard to say, and we don't have "ain't" because that's not a contraction of anything. I've got no problem saying that "aren't I" is grammatical even if it's expansion isn't, but the only reason to say that "aren

deadrat I'm guessing that we don't have "amn't" because two adjacent nasal phonemes are hard to say

That would be my guess too, but this point is not relevant to the syntactic status of aren’t.

Here’s why I don’t think it’s a contraction.

To believe that the syntactic status of "aren't" overrides it's form, is to believe that the syntactic rules that we've derived capture the whole of the mental sorting that distinguishes the "correct" form the ungrammatical. I don't believe that, but I admit it's not much more than a prejudice.

Yes, you can't derive "won't" from "will not." But "will" as auxiliary tag for the future ten

Amn't is indeed a word. It exists mainly in Scottish and Irish English.

http://www.onelook.com/?w=amn%27t&ls=a

"Amn't" is unknown to the OED, unless it's buried in other entries (unlike "won't"). In any case, "Amn't I?" has long lost to "Aren't I?" if not to "Ain't I?"

I always thought it was a contraction of 'am I not'. Am I not the biggest giant you've ever seen?

Amn’t is not a word in standard AmE or BrE.