Difference

Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:22 am GMT
What's the difference between the phrases: "I will go" and " I am gonna go"
Caspian   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:26 am GMT
The first one is correct, and the second one is completely wrong. Perhaps you intended to write 'going to', because 'gonna' is not a word.

Take a look at this:
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t11091.htm
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:34 am GMT
Caspian, are you trying to be funny?

My reckoning would be that ~90% of all English speakers use 'gonna' in casual speech.
Caspian   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:45 am GMT
Have you ever heard the saying 'lies, greater lies and statistics'? This percentage means nothing. Did you know that in 1995 there was a 40% chance of being a crime victim? Does that mean that crime is 40% correct? No.

It's incorrect whether you like it or not, and if 90% of English speakers really can't speak their language properly as they should do, then it is a real shame.
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:48 am GMT
<<It's incorrect whether you like it or not, and if 90% of English speakers really can't speak their language properly as they should do, then it is a real shame.>>

A shame for you. For me? No way bro!
Caspian   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:50 am GMT
Well, perhaps you enjoy seeing your language ruined then.
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:51 am GMT
I wonder how words like "they're", "we're", "I'm" became accepted in normal speech or "can't", "won't", don't" etc.
Caspian   Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:12 am GMT
Yes - they are contractions though, like "walk'd". gonna isn't a contraction - it's a mispronunciation, and no easier to say anyway. It still has 2 syllables.
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:15 am GMT
<<Well, perhaps you enjoy seeing your language ruined then.>>

Not everyone shares your opinion that any change in a language constitutes ruination. Perhaps if you explained what harm the word "gonna" causes...
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:42 am GMT
It's an argument which has been going on since history began, and it was as futile then as it is now, because all languages naturally evolve over time.
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:53 am GMT
Since this thread to be most active, lemme pose a question here.
How is "actresses" pronounced?
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:00 am GMT
Can you read X-SAMPA?

/"{ktr\IsIz/
Caspian   Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:16 am GMT
'Gonna' is gramatically impossible. It is two words combined into one - a present participle (going) and half of an infinitive (to). It is not possible - it would over complicate the language because we would have to treat the whole sentence as a verb. 'To have' is the present tense, but 'to be gonna have' would have o be a verb of its own - with its own conjugations 'To have been gonna have'.
Guest   Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:18 am GMT
<<'Gonna' is gramatically impossible.>>

That's funny. People seem to use and understand it without problems every day despite this "fact" of yours. I wonder why that is.
MythBuster   Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:21 am GMT
<<'Gonna' THEORETICALLY SHOULD BE gramatically impossible. It is two words combined into one - a present participle (going) and half of an infinitive (to). It SHOULD THEORETICALLY not possible - it THEORETICALLY would over complicate the language because we would THEORETICALLY have to treat the whole sentence as a verb. 'To have' is the present tense, but 'to be gonna have' THEORETICALLY would have o be a verb of its own - THEORETICALLY with its own conjugations 'To have been gonna have'.>>



Sorry, but languages are not maths and do not obey strict logic. Hate to burst your bubble, but I guess that's what growing up is all about! Now go clean your room!