TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Ain't: The right time and the right place. From:Andreas Ramos <andreas -at- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Sun, 5 Jun 1994 10:20:41 -0700
Some people here have insisted that "ain't" is never correct. This ties
in with the general discussion of correct/incorrect grammar, etc.
"Ain't" is incorrect if you are writing a technical manual. The language
should be in standard, written, American English.
If you're down South, however, it is completely proper to use "ain't" in
casual conversation; in fact, to use "isn't" is incorrect. That'll mark
you as an outsider.
Any word is proper in the right context. And improper in the wrong context.
yrs,
andreas
_____________________________________________________________________________
Andreas Ramos, M.A. Heidelberg Sacramento, California
On Fri, 3 Jun 1994, Virginia Krenn wrote:
> This message brings to mind a recent posting that commented on the
> usage of ain't. That posting caused me to wonder if its origin was as
> a contraction of am not as opposed to are not and, if so, why it fell
> into disrepute. Anyone know?
> You are not -- You are n't -- You aren't
> I am not -- I am n't -- I amn't (difficult to pronounce,so) -- I ain't
