• HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        We already have an apocope for “got them”, it’s got 'em. You don’t add another consonant. I guess people are saving up their apostrophes for all the incorrect “it’s” they sprinkle everywhere.

        • Varesti@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s almost like language is this constantly evolving thing that can’t be nailed down to strict rules when spoken/used in the real world.

        • FreeLikeGNU@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Thanks for “apocope”! I learned a new word today! It’s amusing to see such passion in what the correct usage of spelling should be for a word morphed by how it has been spoken. Would we be presumptuous, if not playful, to say that “gottem” in its multisyllabic form is without similar merit as got 'em?

          • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            It doesn’t even make sense. “Wanna” means “want to” where the “to” is elided to a final “uh” sound, just like gotta. “Gottem” makes you want to pronounce the T even harder and longer, what’s the point?

            “a word morphed by how it has been spoken”

            It’s not “a” word, it’s two words. Got. Them. The rule has always been to use an apostrophe, got 'em! Can not, can’t. At worst: got’em. “Gottem” makes no sense.

            • Bilb!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 days ago

              “Gottem” makes you want to pronounce the T even harder and longer

              Yeah, like “bottom!” Er…