Double contractions

Question

While reading new Potter, I've noticed a few cases of double contractions.

"Well, what's so impressive about that?' whispered Ron, who for some reason looked annoyed. 'You are the best in the year - I'd've told him so if he'd asked me!' "
"Tha's -tha's righ' nice of him, tha' is, an' not turnin' you in, either. I've never really had a lot ter do with Horace Slughorn before ... comin' ter see old Aragog off, though, eh? Well ... he'd've liked that, Aragog would ...'"
Second paragraph is full of contractions, so this double one is not that extraordinary. But still, in both cases they look weird and that's the first time I've ever seen them (or, at least, noticed). Are they allowed; are they used at all?
Jarek

http://hell.pl/agnus/
fewterer - A keeper of dogs or manager of a kennel

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]While reading new Potter, I've noticed a few cases of double contractions. "Well, what's so impressive about that?' whispered Ron, ... that's the first time I've ever seen them (or, at least, noticed). Are they allowed; are they used at all?[/nq]
It's dialogue, so almost everything has been tried there. I'd still like to see dialect building the framework of the novel and standard English in the dialogue. I don't think anyone has done that, although some of us have taken a pot-shot or two:
#begin quoteOne a 'em gud ol' boyz o'r 'ere gots hisse'f in ta da dreenk an' done runned himz pickup treek inta 'at 'ere win'meal finy o'r 'ere. I done seed it an' so I says ta 'is aver feelow 'at were bisides me, I says ta'im: "That does appear at first glance, Charles, to be the sort of juxtapositional reference to the classic Spanish literary work of Cervantes which I could find highly useful in a future usenet post." So me an' 'at guy 'at were bisides me 'at I done talked av afore, up 'ere, does ya-all sees 'ere I is pointin' me finga?, anyways, later but good an' fast, wez gots ta the seen a da axcident an' I says ta 'at aver feelow 'at I keeps talkin' ta on akounts ta 'im bein' right nekst ta me, I says, "The situation here at the accident does appear on first assessment to, indeed, be very grave.

Clearly he has driven his late model, light blue, Ford F-150 pickup into this modern, clean, bird-safe wind generation facility full tilt. Before performing first aid and saving the poor man's life, I shall retrieve my Motorola mobile phone from my automobile in order to place an urgent call for the high quality emergency rescue personnel that our sky high local tax system helps to perpetuate." Soz, 'at were 'at, an' I done gots 'is 'ere medal frum da prazident av 'is 'ere Yoonited Stetz av 'Merikesch so az I cun provz 'at it all done happen axect 'ike I says 'at it done.
#end quote, "Rulli Teltin' At Da Win'mealz"

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]It's dialogue, so almost everything has been tried there.[/nq]
Yep, but I assume that dialogues tend to resemble everyday speech, more or less. And I've never heard such a double contraction, I think... Is it used in spoken English?
(tho I mainly listen to Hollywood movies and BBC streamings)

Jarek

http://****.pl/agnus/
fewterer - A keeper of dogs or manager of a kennel

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]It's dialogue, so almost everything has been tried there.[/nq]
[nq:1]Yep, but I assume that dialogues tend to resemble everyday speech, more or less. And I've never heard such a double contraction, I think... Is it used in spoken English?[/nq]
A double contraction like "I'd've" is a quite accurate transcription of what many native speakers actually say. Using it in a printed representation of dialogue can be a way of writing down what the fictional speaker is actually saying.
[nq:1](tho I mainly listen to Hollywood movies and BBC streamings)[/nq]
Listen to some of the movie dialogue involving small-time criminals or rural characters and you'll hear a lot of things that are best represented in print by a double contraction.
Of course, such things shouldn't be used in formal writing, where even single contractions are rare.

Bob Lieblich
Native contractor

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]The particular double contractions about which the original poster wondered ... speech of the people in question. They don't go overboard.[/nq]
[nq:1]Agreed but I still prefer: I'd've told him so ...and... he'd've liked that ...as... I'd of told him so ...and... he'd of liked that The literary pedigree of the latter is unimpeachable, it is easier on the eye and no different on the ear.[/nq]
While an argument could be made in favor of "of" in this usage I've even made it myself critics of eye dialect have usually used "of" for "'ve" as a typical example of the sort of dialectal representation which should be avoided at all cost.
They usually include "wuz" as well, which some in this newsgroup and/or in alt.usage.english have defended as acceptable namely those people who don't themselves pronounce "was" to rhyme with "buzz." I've given my reasons to avoid "wuz" in other posts, but they aren't quite the same reasons as the arguments which are traditionally made against it.

Again, please note that it is not the representation of dialect which is being criticized, but a particular type of representation, eye dialect, which constitutes a sort of insult to the person whose speech is being transcribed. "Lissen" for "listen" is eye dialect; "cain't" for "can't" is an acceptable representation of dialect using phonetic spelling.

Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Agreed but I still prefer: I'd've told him so ...and... ... easier on the eye and no different on the ear.[/nq]
[nq:1]While an argument could be made in favor of "of" in this usage I've even made it myself critics of eye dialect ... being transcribed. "Lissen" for "listen" is eye dialect; "cain't" for "can't" is an acceptable representation of dialect using phonetic spelling.[/nq]
An argument can be made that the "eye dialect" is being used to mark something as dialect. How would you represent American "can't" vs Brit "can't"?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Again, please note that it is not the representation of ... "can't" is an acceptable representation of dialect using phonetic spelling.[/nq]
[nq:1]An argument can be made that the "eye dialect" is being used to mark something as dialect. How would you represent American "can't" vs Brit "can't"?[/nq]
Ray's point is that the "eye dialect" spelling is pronounced the same as the standard spelling, at least in the US, which makes it suprefluous. You asked about "can't," but that's a different story, because an American dialectal pronunciation different from the standard one could be represented by "cain't." Similarly, the British pronunciation could be represented by "cahn't." This is NOT eye dialect, because the difference in spelling corresponds to a genuine difference in pronunciation.
What follows concerns American pronunciation only: When "was" is spelled "wuz," or when "listen" is spelled "lissen," that's eye dialect. Because the standard American pronunciation for "was" is "wuz," and the standard American pronunciation for "listen" is "lissen"(1), the change in spelling serves no phonetic purpose. It condescends to a speaker who deserves no condescension, at least on that score. In contrast, "Warshennon" ("r" pronounced) is not eye dialect; it records a common but nonstandard pronunciation of Washington."
You may say that "eye dialect" can work in conjunction with variant spellings that represent actual variant pronunciations to represent dialect, as in "Lissen! Cain't you hee-year them birds singin'?" But you don't need the added eye-dialect variant; the dialectal nature of the recorded speech is quite clear without. And reading this sort of stuff is tough enough without the addition of superfluous variants.

I'm with Ray. True variant pronunciations can legitimately be transcribed with variant spellings, but changing the spelling when there's no change in pronunciation is worse than pointless it's distracting.
(1) The same would be true of "soffen" for "soften." The "t" is silent. There is no different in proununciation. Consider also "whut" and "wun," among many others.

Bob Lieblich
Whuzzup?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]"Well, what's so impressive about that?' whispered Ron, who for some reason looked annoyed. 'You are the best in the year - I'd've told him so if he'd asked me!' "[/nq]
Nothing wrong with I'd've. I say that pretty often, and other double contractions too. And I hear it often too. I think it is as valid as can't and won't.
"If I'd'a' seen you comin' would've baked a cake, baked a cake, If I'd'a' seen you comin' would've baked a cake, doodah, doodah, day."
Something like that.
"Tho" is spelled "though", btw.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
now in Baltimore 22 years

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]"If I'd'a' seen you comin' would've baked a cake, baked a cake, If I'd'a' seen you comin' would've baked a cake, doodah, doodah, day." Something like that.[/nq]
Thank you.
[nq:1]"Tho" is spelled "though", btw.[/nq]
Er, that I know. But "tho" also exists in dictionaries, and it's completely my personal and subjective preference.
Speaking of which, how ,,tho'' is received by you? Speaker doesn't know the language, looks like a British/American/Aussie/Anyone in particular? Anything else?
Jarek

http://****.pl/agnus/
noyade - Mass drowing

Usenet · Answer

Lots of things are in dictionaries that you shouldn't use.
[nq:1]my personal and subjective preference.[/nq]
Why do you bother learning English? To communicate with English speakers in your personal and professional life, right? As far as your professional life goes, you won't score any points with "tho".

Why should readers who care about rules of English care about your personal and subjunctive preference? When you write a letter to yourself, you can go by your own preferences.
[nq:1]Speaking of which, how ,,tho'' is received by you? Speaker doesn't know the language, looks like a British/American/Aussie/Anyone in particular? Anything else?[/nq]
You made some syntax erros in this paragraph. If you otherwise wrote perfect English, a) you might get away with writing "tho" because it would be only one error in an otherwise faultless piece of writing; b) you'd know when you can use it and when you can't afford to; c) you wouldn't want to use "tho" in the first place.
[nq:1]Jarek[/nq]
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
now in Baltimore 22 years

Double contractions

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions