# They're not, or They aren't? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 28, 2003, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531 "2003-07-28T22:17:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Splanky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@Splanky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Splanky)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2003, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/1 "2003-07-28T22:17:43Z")
Is there any consensus on which is the proper abbreviation for the phrase “They are not”? I’d assume that both are technically correct but is one preferred by English experts? ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2003, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/2 "2003-07-28T22:25:50Z")
All I know is that in grade school, you were fine if you said “it isn’t!” but invited a lot of snickering if you said “it’s not!” (“If it’s snot, wipe your nose!”) ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2003, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/3 "2003-07-28T22:27:39Z")
How about they’ren’t? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![typhoon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ed8c4c/32.png) [@typhoon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typhoon)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2003, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/4 "2003-07-28T22:35:24Z")
They’re both perfectly valid. Use whichever you prefer. ---
**Author:** ![raygirvan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ac91a4/32.png) [@raygirvan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raygirvan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/5 "2003-07-29T00:16:45Z")
Agreed with **typhoon** : at least from a UK English viewpoint, both are absolutely fine (assuming you’re speaking/writing in a context where your audience doesn’t have a downer on contractions). ---
**Author:** ![photopat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e95f7d/32.png) [@photopat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/photopat)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/6 "2003-07-29T00:43:04Z")
Okay, so I guess this is poll time, then? I’m generally a “They’re not” person. ---
**Author:** ![green\_bladder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/73ab20/32.png) [@green\_bladder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/green_bladder)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/7 "2003-07-29T10:23:32Z")
I use both. But to me, “they aren’t” looks better written, but when speaking, I generally use “they’re not” ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/8 "2003-07-29T11:09:42Z")
Both are fine. Switch hit. It confuses people. Even more fun are: They’ve not They haven’t There may be a touch of regionalism with such things, but I assume they’re equally acceptable grammatically. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/9 "2003-07-29T13:11:38Z")
Can I just point out that “could of” is _not_ an acceptable variant of “could’ve”? ---
**Author:** ![Shrinking\_Violet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@Shrinking\_Violet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shrinking_Violet)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/10 "2003-07-29T13:55:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Balthisar \* > \*\*Can I just point out that “could of” is _not_ an acceptable variant of “could’ve”? \*\* It isn’t _even_ a variant of could’ve, which is a compression of “could have”. “Could of” is plain wrong, and makes me wince. Julie ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/11 "2003-07-29T16:04:25Z")
**Shrinking Violet** , that was kind of my point. I really did mean variant, in the sense of unplanned variant. People that write “could of” just don’t seem the realize they mean “could’ve” – here in Michigan we say them the same. I’ll _say_ what sounds like “could of” only because it’s virtually identical to “could’ve.” It drives me crazy, too. When I read it – often from smart, educated engineers – I have to re-read the sentence because “of” is programmed in my brain as “of” and not “-'ve.” ---
**Author:** ![Stana\_Claus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stana_claus/32/13874_2.png) [@Stana\_Claus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stana_Claus)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/12 "2003-07-29T16:22:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Splanky \* > \*\*Is there any consensus on which is the proper abbreviation for the phrase “They are not”? I’d assume that both are technically correct but is one preferred by English experts? \*\* Which one I use depends on where I wish the emphasis to be placed. To me, at least, “they’re not” has a much stronger negative impact than “they aren’t”. SC ---
**Author:** ![moriah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b2d939/32.png) [@moriah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moriah)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2003, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/13 "2003-07-29T17:16:28Z")
Google fight! They are not – 3.63 million They’re not – 1.64 million They aren’t – 1.08 million I’m not – 4.33 m I am not – 3.12 m I ain’t – .42 m It is not – 6.23 m It’s not – 4.75 m (includes contraction of ‘it has not’) It isn’t – 2.42 m You are not – 4.64 m You’re not – 2.89 m You aren’t – 1.19 m They have not – 1.1 m They haven’t – .75 m They’ve not – .02 m I have not – 1.78 m I haven’t – 3.2 m I’ve not – .35 m It has not – 1.29 m It’s not – 4.75 (includes contraction of ‘it is not’) It hasn’t – .73 m You haven’t – 2.56 You have not – 2.1 You’ve not – .08 Note that the contractions of “you haven’t” and “I’m not” beat out their uncontracted forms. Note the relative infrequency of “you’ve not” and “they’ve not.” ## Peace. I would haven’t preferred to go into such a detailed analysis. ---
**Author:** ![smaft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c2a13f/32.png) [@smaft](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smaft)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2003, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/14 "2003-07-30T14:38:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by moriah \* > Note the relative infrequency of “you’ve not” and “they’ve not.” Bah, clearly they’ve not been looking at my stuff- both of these constructions are staples of my written lexicon. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2003, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/15 "2003-07-30T18:38:52Z")
But how do the double contractions measure up? Personally, I try to use constructions like “I’ven’t” whenever applicable. ---
**Author:** ![Splanky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@Splanky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Splanky)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyre-not-or-they-arent/191531/16 "2003-07-31T01:31:04Z")
I’ven’t- 340 (not in millions, just plain 340) It doesn’t look so good Chronos.