Studies of negation in African American English (AAE) typically focus
on its most salient exponents, ain't and negative concord.
Because ain't arose during the development of auxiliary- and
not-contraction in Early Modern English, an interesting question is
whether constraints on ain't can be attributed to more general
constraints on contraction. This article examines the constraints on
not-contraction in three varieties argued to be representative
of Early AAE. Although the analysis is complicated by the
ever-narrowing variable context of ain't and by the
competition of not-contraction with auxiliary contraction,
results are largely parallel across the three varieties, pointing to a
common origin. The parallels between ain't and
not-contraction provide evidence that ain't is
the extension of more general processes of contraction. The most
consistent effect, the presence of negative concord, is argued to
reflect a recurrent process of reinforcement in the history of English
negation.The data on which this study is
based were extracted from corpora housed in the Sociolinguistics
Laboratory at the University of Ottawa. I gratefully acknowledge
Professor Shana Poplack's permission to use these data. Earlier
versions of this article were presented at the annual meeting of the
American Dialect Society (Washington, DC, January 2001) and the third
U.K. Language Variation and Change conference (York, U.K., July 2001).
The analysis benefited from discussions with and comments from Greg
Guy, Dennis Preston, Jennifer Smith, and Gerard Van Herk, as well as
several anonymous reviewers. Special thanks go to Sali Tagliamonte and
Malcah Yaeger-Dror, whose comments substantially improved the article,
and to Anthony Warner for help with translating the Old English
examples. Any remaining errors are my own responsibility.