English language contractions...

tuulen · Post by **tuulen** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:51 am

It appears that in the English language as used in the UK, "contractions" are less often, if ever, used. However, in the American version of the English language, contractions are quite commonly used, such as, I'm, you're, wasn't, didn't, you'll, they'll, etc.

Now, here I am as an American who is accustomed to such contractions, but I wonder as to how familiar, and as to how comfortable, those here on Finland Forum, and especially you Finns, could be with such as contractions.

The reason why I am asking is because I do not know, but am quite glad to use whatever form of English language which could be more accepted, here, on Finland Forum, as I could go either way.

Or, could anybody here prefer that I use such contractions, liberally, as we Americans ordinarily do?

**Sponsor:**

onkko · Post by **onkko** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:00 am

To me those are stupid, if you want shorter word then do it finnish way and really shorten it!
Most/many of us i dare to say are grown up and learned US english or atleast know it. I see that stupid anyway.

Take a hint. Minä olen = moon, Sinä olet = soot etc, your ´ is joke because mostly you dont even save a letter.

tuulen · Post by **tuulen** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:28 am

onkko wrote:To me those are stupid, if you want shorter word then do it finnish way and really shorten it!
Most/many of us i dare to say are grown up and learned US english or atleast know it. I see that stupid anyway.

Take a hint. Minä olen = moon, Sinä olet = soot etc, your ´ is joke because mostly you dont even save a letter.

Thank you, I now know more about the Finnish perspective to the English language, and from now on I will not use contractions.

I am only at a beginner's level with the Finnish language, and I have not yet adopted contracted Finnish.

First, however, let me learn "standard" Finnish, and after that I will make an effort to learn contracted Finnish.

BTW, Finnish really is a great language!

:-)

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:50 am

tuulen wrote:Now, here I am as an American who is accustomed to such contractions, but I wonder as to how familiar, and as to how comfortable, those here on Finland Forum, and especially you Finns, could be with such as contractions.

They're used in speech, but the limeys don't write them down as it makes y'all look trailertrash.

Reads in some grammar book like that, must be Fowler's from 1909.

I wouldn't give a horse's arse over contractions, its the hi 2 u 2 l33tspeak that gets on my tits. Now as well as the Finnish modern SMS-talk (onx ihq?) is much worse that writing in dialect.

tuulen · Post by **tuulen** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:48 am

Pursuivant wrote:...They're used in speech...

It occurred to me that because the UK is physically much closer to Finland than the US is, it could be likely that UK-English could be more familiar to Finns than US-English could be, and then, from my many online "conversations" with those from the UK, I recalled that they rarely if ever use contractions in their text, whereas in the US such contractions are commonplace. So, I asked the question as I did, and, moreover, if non-contracted English is the standard here, then I will adopt it, but please forgive me should I fail on occasion, for as an American I simply am not accustomed to it.

Then again, I have discovered that it is fairly easy to remember the spelling of "standard" Finnish words, as WYSIWYG, and vice versa, and were I to phonetically spell the more commonly used US-English in a fashion such as Finnish does, the results could be radically different, perhaps verging on unintelligible! So, credit goes to Finland for having a language which has such a strong correlation between sound and spelling.

That may sound stupid to those of you who can speak contracted Finnish, frankly, but to me it is one of the delights of the Finnish language!

:-)

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:14 am

teör is natink ronk vit vonetikali spelink, its tö spiikink täts tö hjuuts sälents

Janat · Post by **Janat** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:20 am

I don't know about what kind of English older Finns are used to, but in these days they teach us both British and American English, and using contractions is common. In fact non-contracted English is mostly used when you want to underline some things, otherwise contractions are used.

Oh and I'm a native Finn and am talking about my own experiences, don't kill me if you find some exceptions

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:19 pm

More common is to use contractions wrong. Its always safer to write them open so you don't confuse its with it's

Janat · Post by **Janat** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:01 pm

Pursuivant wrote:More common is to use contractions wrong. Its always safer to write them open so you don't confuse its with it's

Well that depends on where you live and who you talk to. There really is no standrard, but without using contractions you can't go wrong.

Bubba Elvis XIV · Post by **Bubba Elvis XIV** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:45 pm

As Pursuivant said...Contractions in the UK are for spokened English....wroted English shouldn't contain them...(OMG, I'm English and I just used a contraction...And another...it's great that Americans tell us Brits how we use English!). But it depends on formal and informal writing, and also whether you wish to soften messages and appear friendly etc etc. It's not so black and white (Ooooow, Shamon).

As has been mentioned B4...If you look at TEFl books and all that contractions are now taught as 'normal' writen English. I was messing around on a site during a class with a group and 'I am...' gave a nice big red cross and 'I'm...' got a nice big green tick. And that was a British based website.

As for Finns and which version of English they are taught, it depends. I know teachers who would never teach an American slang word, or even mention that "in the UK, they write Mum and the US, Mom" (I perosnally think that's wrong...but...). But I know other teachers who teach American.

Me...I do both. Of course, pronunciation is English. But vocab, I explain both, same with spelling. Usually I tell people not to get wrapped up in it, communication is more important...unless they're doing tests where they can lose marks for mixed spelling, grammar.

But the reality is that you can't always seperate English and American (and other versions) so clearly.

Personally it's all about politics..but that's for another thread.

Er....I went off topic a tad there.

Bubba Elvis XIV · Post by **Bubba Elvis XIV** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:52 pm

One thing I have noticed with Finns in the class is that they'll read contractions as...er....uncontractions!

So the sentence will say 'I won't see you later' and they will read 'I will not see you later'...not always but with a lot of them. When I have asked them about it they say it's what they were taught to do at school - I dunno!

Bavarian · Post by **Bavarian** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:26 pm

Pursuivant wrote:teör is natink ronk vit vonetikali spelink, its tö spiikink täts tö hjuuts sälents

I'm sure you saw this letter last autumn....

Bubba Elvis XIV · Post by **Bubba Elvis XIV** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:33 pm

That was good...cheered me up while washing floors!

Bavarian · Post by **Bavarian** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:39 pm

Bubba Elvis XIV wrote:(OMG, I'm English and I just used a contraction...And another...it's great that Americans tell us Brits how we use English!).

That's because Americans have the good sense to pronounce the R's where they appear on the page, and not move them around.

One of my favorite examples of this was listening to a BBC announcer talking about "the two careers". I had no idea what the heck he meant, until the correspondent mentioned "north career and south career".

Another BBC presenter talked about Italy's having the "Son and pastor" necessary to produce great opera singers. This bizarre reference to Catholicism and opera made no sense to me, until context eventually made it clear that what the presenter had intended to say was that Italy has the "sun and pasta" that makes great opera singers.

I really feel sorry for the Canadians, though. As a neighbor of the US and a member of the British Commonwealth, they have the worst of both worlds on the spelling and pronunciation front.

Bubba Elvis XIV · Post by **Bubba Elvis XIV** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:45 pm

It is quite interesting that most Brits can understand American quite well and yet Americans can't always understand English...

I think that says a lot. But I won't accuse you of being ignorant, insular, uneducated, illiterate, cultural imperialists.

(Edit: for spelling mistakes....

)

Finland Forum

Find information about moving to, living in and life in Finland