As you all know Can’t is an abbreviation of cannot . One uses an apostrophe to subsitute to no in the word. Nothing complex about that.
But what about Won’t ? It is the abbreviation for will not, but if you follow the aforementioned logic, the abbreviation should be willn’t. So why the breach from common practice?
The OED indicates that there were various other contractions of “will not,” among them “wynnot,” “wonnot,” “woonot,” and even “willn’t.” Of those numberous forms, only “won’t” survives to this day. And there were variant spellings of “will not” as “woll not” as well.
It might also be worth noting that language doesn’t follow the rules of logic. Words mean what we use them to mean and logic isn’t a consideration.
Dude, if you’re expecting English to make sense, you’re going to be very disappointed. Sorry. There isn’t really a “common practice” for anything, and especially not for contractions.
Is it online? link?
It’s online, but you need to pay for a subscription. Check your local library web page; they may allow patrons to use it.
But the reason it’s “won’t” is euphony: a single syllable that’s easy to pronounce and remember.
Words and their usage and meanings develop due to consensus: people start using them in that context and it just catches on. Languages aren’t devised and follow whatever meanders their speakers use.
I shan’t contribute much with this post, and you won’t click the link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv184.shtml