There are / There're

For how many of you is the contraction "there're" a proper English word?
I've asked several native speakers around me and some say it sounds very stupid, and others say they use it quite regularly.

If the contraction "there're" is okay for you, how would you pronounce it?
I would pronounce it /DEr@`/, but would it be hard to pronounce it when it's followed by a vowel like in this sentence "There're a lot of..." /DEr@`r@ lA4@v/?

Also I wonder if there's any difference in the usage between American Eng and British Eng, (possibly Aus and other varieties of Eng).

Thanks in advance.

Also please correct them if you find any mistakes in my sentences! thanks:)

<<For how many of you is the contraction "there're" a proper English word?
I've asked several native speakers around me and some say it sounds very stupid, and others say they use it quite regularly.>>

Are you referring to the written form or the pronunciation? I would never write "there're" even though it represents my usual pronunciation of "there are" when speaking.

I'd be surprised to hear a native speaker say it sounds very stupid audially. Most pronounce it with this contraction subconsciously in speech and may only become aware of it when writing out the two words.

Maybe it sounds very stupid to non-native speakers.

thanks guest for your reply.

I mean both the written form and the pronunciation. When I asked the native speakers around me I mentioned the written form more, though. How would you feel if you see the written form "there're" in a formal piece of writing?

Guy:

I'd agree with "Guest."

I hear "ther-ur" and "therr" all the time. However, unlike "they're" or "we're," it is never used in written English to my knowledge.

I agree with Guest and JJM.

In addition to the above discussion, the conversational "there're" is never used on its own. It is used only directly before the description of what, exactly, there are:
"There're several cats in the tree." (Note that there is little or no audible gap between the "there're" and subsequent "several," resulting in a sound like "theurseveral."

The contraction is never used on its own, as "are" is almost always emphatic in a short spoken response:

"Are there clowns in the circus?"
"There are."
(Note that the rushed "there're," not followed immediately by another word, would sound simply like "there.")

It's no more improper than any other contraction, like we're, she's, it's, can't, aren't, or don't. It's used quite often in the US.

"There're" is used by many if not most speakers here even if they don't realize it (and most people wouldn't normally write it that way). You're right, it's pronounced ["DEr\@`]. For "there are a lot of" it'd be ["DEr\@` @ lA4 @v] as I'd say it. Hope that helps :)

Contractions are not uncommon in languages. Besides English, Scottish Gaelic and spoken French seem to have a lot of them too.

In Romanian, we see a similar phenomenon in a sentence like "My mother and sister are not at church" which can be said as either "Mamã s'i sorã nu sunt la biserica" or "Mamã s'i sorã nu's la biserica." I knew a Romanian speaker once who would have preferred the first form and considered 'nu's' a colloquialism from the country but English is not quite the same way about words like "aren't" and "they're." It might consider them to be informal but not colloquial.

I might add that Swiss German has a lot of contractions two. Some Swiss tourists once told me that instead of saying standard German "Wie geht es ihnen?" ("How are you?") thay they often just said Wie geht'sn?"

two = too. (Don't have my glasses on right now).

thanks people for your answers and advice. I really appreciate them.

So i guess what i should do is use them in spoken language, but not write it as a contracted form. (so... i can say /DEr@`/ but not write it as "there're")

Is there any other contractions that are used very commonly in spoken language but not written as it is pronounced? if there are many i hope you can just name some:)

thanks!

I think most contractions are usually avoided in formal writing, but that doesn't make them improper per se. I used one just now -- "doesn't" -- and I don't think anyone would find that colloquial or substandard. I think the avoidance of contractions in formal writing is more of a convention.

<<I think most contractions are usually avoided in formal writing, but that doesn't make them improper per se. I used one just now -- "doesn't" -- and I don't think anyone would find that colloquial or substandard. I think the avoidance of contractions in formal writing is more of a convention.>>

Yeah, the avoidance of contractions in formal writing is more of a convention than trying to avoid being colloquial or substandard.