(I don’t know if I should post this topic here or on the Great Debates)
What’s wrong with the word ain’t? Sure, English purists hate this word but everyone I know have used this word at one time. Some authorities in english usage have already accepted this word for informal use yet the debate continues. What do you people think?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And the beholders of the English language have determined that “ain’t” ain’t a proper word. There’s nothing to keep you from using it. However, if I received a resume with the word “ain’t” on it, I would assume that the person is uneducated. So use it,if you want, but what you use determines what people think of you.
I kind of like the word myself.
If I remember correctly it is the conjunction for …A…WEll …Ammmm ain’t.
Is 'ain’t got no" a double negitive? Probably not because ain’t ain’t no word.
Don’t listen to all these old stuffed shirts.
It has its place.
There I go tripping over my own tongue again.Guess I’ll leave being funny to someone else. Guess it is the contraction of am not:O
:o :o :o
from New Dictionary by Kurt Vonnegut:
To find out in a rush whether a dictionary is prescriptive or descriptive, you look up ain’t and like. I learned this trick of horseback logomachy from reviews of the “Merriam-Webster” third edition. And here is the rundown on ain’t: the “Merriam-Webster” first edition says that it is colloquial or illiterate, the second says it is dialect or illiterate, and the third says that ain’t is, “though disapproved by many and more common in less educated speech, used orally . . . by many cultivated speakers esp. in the phrase ain’t I.” I submit that this nation is so uniformly populated by parvenus with the heebie-jeebies that the phrase ain’t I is heard about as frequently as the mating cry of the heath hen.
Random House says this about *ain't:* "*Ain't* is so traditionally and widely regarded as a nonstandard form that it should be shunned by all who prefer to avoid being considered illiterate. *Ain't* occurs occasionally in the informal speech of some educated users, especially in self-consciously (sic) or folksy or humourous contexts *(Ain't it the truth! She ain't what she used to be!)*, but it is completely unacceptable in formal writing and speech. Although the expression *ain't I* is perhaps defensible--and it is considered more logical than *aren't I?* and more euphonious than *amn't I?*--the well-advised person will avoid any use of *ain't.*" How's that for advice to parvenus?
My mother isn't mentioned, but what she taught me to say in place of *ain't I?* or *amn't I?* was *am I not?* Speed isn't everything. So I lose a micro-second here and there. The main thing is to be a *graceful* parvenu.
what is essential is invisible to the eye -the fox
Your verbiage should never be taint
By anything soundin’ like ‘ain’t’.
Or the air waves’ll all’ve deignt,
To cause the ladies to faint.
And you’ll never get writ up a saint.
Ray (Do that? I r’ally cain’t.)
The phrase “you people” is more abhorant to us purists than is the word “ain’t.” Actually, grammarians used to accept the usage of “ain’t” as standard; it began as a conjunction of “are not.” I hope you ain’ gonna continue to say “you people,” though. See, the proper phrase is, “you peopleS.”
If it ain’t broke…
…you’re not trying
Red Green
ASPA-
“abhorant”???
For a purist, you don’t spell so well. 
How 'bout one more pedant?
conjunction?
I think, “ain’t” is a contraction, not a conjunction.
or, formally: You’ze people
Yes, exactly. It’d be a contraction. Please file my retraction.
Broken spelling? Cmetzb comes to my moral defense, in the posting just above your original. (See above.)
I believe that’s correct. It’s funny that in English we have contractions for the second person form of “to be” with the negative (you aren’t), and the third person (she isn’t), but nothing for the first person. Perhaps “ain’t” was developed to make up for this lack, since it sounds better than “amn’t”.
Mjollnir asked this a while ago here.
Actually, the Scots (if not the British) do use “amn’t,” instead of “aren’t”, I believe…as in “I’m right, amn’t I?”
I’ve never heard that in England, nor scotland for that matter.
I did numerous times, and had several discussions about it. None of the other Scots raised an eyebrow. See it in letters, too. They could be pulling my leg, but it’s doubtful, since they’re in two different cliques.