Tatiana Ayazo /ShutterstockLike many grammar rules in the English language, using “won’t” as the contraction for “will not” doesn’t make a lot of sense. If we formed it like most other contractions, the result would be “willn’t.” Admittedly, that is a bit more difficult to say than “willn’t,” but come on, English language. What’s the deal?
Tatiana Ayazo /ShutterstockBlame our European ancestors. Centuries ago, the Ye Olde English verb willan (which meant to wish or will) had two forms: wil- for the present tense and wold- for the past tense. But as time went on, the pronunciation of these verbs kept changing, from “wool” to “wel” to “woll” to “ool.”
Tatiana Ayazo /ShutterstockBy the 16th century, there was finally some consensus on the preferred versions of this pesky word. Wil- became the familiar “will,” and wold- became our “would.” But the most popular form of the negative verb became “woll not,” which was contracted to “wonnot,” which modern English turned into “won’t.”
So contracting “will not” the logical way may not be so logical after all. However, there are grammar rules you definitely should follow, if for no other reason than sounding more intelligent.