Diamond, Linda Eve. "Ain 't: Used to Be." Vocabula Review. N.p., 05 Apr. 2010. Web.
Linda Eve Diamond is a self-employed writer and the author of nine books on topics ranging from poetry to business and listening skills. Prior to writing freelance, she spent fifteen developing and delivering corporate training programs in the areas of personal performance, managerial skills, business writing, and interpersonal communications. In this article, Diamond discuses that in the eighteenth century the word ain’t was accepted just like any of the other contractions. However, it all changed in the nineteenth century when the people who studied and wrote about grammar decided to change the rules to be similar to Latin. Even though …show more content…
In this article, Stevens starts off by informing his audience that the contraction ain’t is at the moment very disapproved in language. Just like other author, Stevens mentions the word ain’t has little evidence of when it was first recorded. Stevens argues, we cannot be confident of the time when the contraction ain’t was formed. Yet, probably it has been around much longer than most dictionary indicate. Stevens discusses why grammarians are against using the word ain’t. according to his research it was developed based on mistake beliefs. Stevens explains, the word ain’t continues to be protested, because we have the words isn’t and aren’t. He goes on to explain the word aren’t cannot be used in all three present tense form of the verb to be. However, ain’t can be used for the verb to be and to have. Stevens mentions the English language is always inclined to reduce complexity yet, ain’t continues to be …show more content…
He is a professor in the Department of German, Scandinavian and Dutch at the University of Minnesota, where he has taught courses on the history of all the Germanic languages and literatures, folklore, mythology, lexicography, European structuralism, and Russian formalism. Liberman explains the origin of the word ain’t is derived and ties with “hain’t”. Then later turned into a universal substitute for the contraction of the verb be and have. The word ain’t can be declared as vulgar, slangy and informal. Liberman argues, that the word ain’t is a useful form, but it will continue to be rejected by grammarians. The word ain’t has been attacked by grammarians since 1788. Liberman explains, the word ain’t is more widely used today than ever before. It is heard from almost every level of