1

Although there you can find the below example on the website of Cambridge, I had a feedback from an English teacher telling me that the two contractions in bold in the second sentence are wrong. What do you think?

Cambridge: My sister’s got married. See this link

I'd appreciate it if you could stay with us at our place for a week or something, and my wife'd be over the moon about this. We could have a lot of fun together, and my children'd also love to spend time with your boys.

1

Yes. They aren't as commonly written as they are said, but they are valid. When they are written it tends to be in imitation of colloquial speech.

With pronouns you can use both:

  • She'd = She had / would
  • She's = She is / has

Same with nouns, for example:

  • My wife's gone.
  • My wife'd have gone.
2
  • I might use such contractions (as _my wife'd) when reproducing very informal speech, but they do look clumsy. Mar 6 '20 at 12:59
  • @KateBunting I agree, that's why I mentioned they are more often said than written. When they are written it tends to be in imitation of colloqiual speech.
    – Astralbee
    Mar 6 '20 at 13:00
0

Yes. In Standard English, the auxiliary "had" and "would" can only be cliticized to a word that ends with a vowel:

The clitic /d/ occurs only after vowels: in Jan had seen it, for example, the auxiliary can't be cliticised to yield a form rhyming with sand.

Huddleston & Pullum (2002: 1616)

The /nd/ cluster in the word "children'd" is worse because the /n/ and /d/ are homorganic — they are both alveolar consonants.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .