Post History
Arnold Zwicky and Geoff Pullum's paper "Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't", published in the September 1983 issue of Language (volume 59, number 3), indicates that I'd've exists. While I'm ...
Answer
#4: Post edited
by
msh210
·
2020-08-09T08:49:19Z (about 4 years ago)
remove distracting nonexample, and use more direct language for the example
[Arnold Zwicky](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Zwicky) and [Geoff Pullum](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Pullum)'s paper ["Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't"](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), published in the September 1983 issue of [_Language_](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_(journal)) (volume 59, number 3), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
- [Arnold Zwicky](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Zwicky) and [Geoff Pullum](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Pullum)'s paper ["Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't"](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), published in the September 1983 issue of [_Language_](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_(journal)) (volume 59, number 3), indicates that _I'd've_ exists. While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
#3: Post edited
by
msh210
·
2020-08-09T05:05:10Z (about 4 years ago)
[Arnold Zwicky](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Zwicky) and [Geoff Pullum](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Pullum)'s paper ["Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't"](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), published in the September 1983 issue of _Language_ (volume 59, number 3), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
- [Arnold Zwicky](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Zwicky) and [Geoff Pullum](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Pullum)'s paper ["Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't"](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), published in the September 1983 issue of [_Language_](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_(journal)) (volume 59, number 3), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
#2: Post edited
by
msh210
·
2020-08-09T04:58:10Z (about 4 years ago)
links
Arnold Zwicky and Geoff Pullum's paper "Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't", published in the September 1983 issue of _Language_ (volume 59, number 3), [doi:10.2307/413900](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
- [Arnold Zwicky](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Zwicky) and [Geoff Pullum](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Pullum)'s paper ["Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't"](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), published in the September 1983 issue of _Language_ (volume 59, number 3), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.
#1: Initial revision
by
msh210
·
2020-08-09T04:54:08Z (about 4 years ago)
Arnold Zwicky and Geoff Pullum's paper "Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't", published in the September 1983 issue of _Language_ (volume 59, number 3), [doi:10.2307/413900](http://doi.org/10.2307/413900), indicates that _I'd've_ is possible (but _I'dn't_ is not). While I'm not completely sure what sort of normativity you seek, I think this might satisfy you.