| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| there're - word or a not a word |
| word |
|
21% |
[ 9 ] |
| not a word |
|
78% |
[ 33 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 42 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:31 pm Post subject: there're |
 |
|
there're
word or not a word? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stat
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| not 'a' word, but I reckon it's a technically legitimate - if unusual - way of shortening 'there are'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tzechuk
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I use there're. I am sure it's legit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Draven
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It's not listed in either www.m-w.com or www.dictionary.com , while other contractions are. It does draw 582,000 hits on a Google search, however. Draw what conclusions you like from that information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Confused Canadian
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the way I view it...
I think it's acceptable along the same lines as "gonna" and "wanna". Though technically not words, they are written expressions of how we speak naturally (reduced pronunciation).
I might use "there're" in a written dialogue to emphasize the pronunciation, just as I might use "people're", or any other plural noun + "'re."
However, I wouldn't make the leap and call it an actual word, contracted or otherwise.
Just my 2 cents...
Confused Canadian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tzechuk
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
there's, there're [Nov 04]
there's = contraction of there is
There's [There is] a problem [singular noun] with the software.
There's [There is] one task [singular noun] left to do.
Tip: The form theres and the form theres' are never correct.
there're = contraction of there are
There're [There are] several problems [plural noun] with the software.
There're [There are] three tasks [plural noun] left to do |
I found this here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keithinkorea
Joined: 17 Mar 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well it seems legitimate, but it looks horrible and lazy, and I would never encourage students to use it.
I also wouldn't encourage them to pronounce 'Where did you?' as 'Wherja?' as one particular rotten textbook does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JacktheCat
Joined: 08 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think they introduce contractions way too early in most English classes and textbooks.
Contractions should come later, after the students have a basic grasp of English. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keithinkorea
Joined: 17 Mar 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JacktheCat wrote: |
I think they introduce contractions way too early in most English classes and textbooks.
Contractions should come later, after the students have a basic grasp of English. |
I agree with you 100 percent on this one. This is a huge problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Confused Canadian
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| keithinkorea wrote: |
| JacktheCat wrote: |
I think they introduce contractions way too early in most English classes and textbooks.
Contractions should come later, after the students have a basic grasp of English. |
I agree with you 100 percent on this one. This is a huge problem. |
On one hand, I agree with both of you. Contractions do tend to confuse student's, especially younger ones. However...
The contractions that are taught are usually necessary to understand spoken English. That's when we use contractions; when we speak. If all you study are terms like "it is" and "they are", you'll never understand people saying "it's" and "they're". They sound completely different, and to a new speaker of the language, unless they were taught about contractions, would assume them to be different words.
Thus, I see them as a necessary evil...
Confused Canadian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajuma
Joined: 18 Feb 2003
Location: Anywere but Seoul!!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In speaking...yes. In writing...NO!!!! We "say" a lot of things that we never would write! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ambvalent
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ajuma wrote: |
| In speaking...yes. In writing...NO!!!! We "say" a lot of things that we never would write! |
I'll be making my way over to Korea within a few months, but before I go, I was interested in finding a good grammar book that explains rules a bit more than merely referencing them...anyone have a good idea for this? Although I haven't seen anything better, I feel like my old grammar books from school are lacking.
Off the top of my head, I thought that "there're" sounded like bad English and something you wouldn't necessarily teach a student. Should you generally teach what is slang and what is proper english? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajuma
Joined: 18 Feb 2003
Location: Anywere but Seoul!!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My favorite "grammar" book isn't actually a grammar book. Collin's CoBuild English Usage is great for teaching HOW words are used. For a decent book with the "rules", Grammar in Use is good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
