• 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
      ·
      4 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…