Quote:
Originally Posted by kALMIGHTY
Actually "Why can't I..." is perfectly fine.
The only problem that occurs is when you expand the contraction, which has to become "Why can I not..."
"Why I can't..." wouldn't make any sense depending on the context it's used in.
All of these make sense in proper context.
For example. "Why can't I hold all these limes?" makes sense.
Without the contraction, it would have to be. "Why can I not hold all these limes?"
Saying "Why I can't hold all these limes?" doesn't make sense, but it can if you change the sentence/question into. "Why I can't hold all these limes, I'll never know." which would be the structural alternative to the sentence "I'll never know why I can't hold all these limes."
|
Thanks. I think you're right. I found a discussion on a site called stackexchange.com and this is one of the comments I liked.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shinji
"Arnold M. Zwicky and Geoffrey K. Pullum have shown that -n't is not just a contraction of not. The two American linguists pointed out that you can say why don't you... but not *why do not you... because you can place one and only one auxiliary before the subject in an interrogative phrase. Don't is a single word while do not are two words. -n't is not a clitic but a negative inflectional suffix.
Cannot is the only negative form that contains not rather than -n't. Theoretically, since it is a single word, you can say why cannot you... without a problem. My theory is that modern English speakers don't want to put cannot before the subject because it contains not and sounds like can not. You definitely cannot say why can not you... with a separate not. On the contrary can't remains a single word, which is why they use it more and more often."
|
Link to comment:
http://english.stackexchange.com/a/75065