5

This question already has an answer here:

Is it correct to write I am Gerardo and I am here. or I am Gerardo and I'm here. Is there any difference between these two statements?

marked as duplicate by FumbleFingers, user49727, cornbread ninja 麵包忍者, choster, Bradd Szonye Sep 24 '13 at 0:32

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 2
    Please do not use an acute accent mark in lieu of an apostrophe. – tchrist Sep 23 '13 at 19:29
6

As you can see from this discussion, their meaning is semantically identical, but the contraction indicates informality relative to the non-contracted form.

As FumbleFingers mentions in another comment, "I am" has an additional attribute that "I'm" lacks. When "I am" is used as an affirmative response, it can imply an echo of the query:

Who is X? I am. [Implying "I am X".]

Whereas "I'm" requires echoing the query:

Who is X? I'm X.

1

Semantically, they're the same. But in many contexts they differ pragmatically. Imagine a large, though not very lavish, convention. Several mikes traverse the numerous audience, for which there aren't enough lights, so they're pretty much in the dark. Somebody takes the mike and says something truly interesting. The guests on stage squint and strain their necks trying to make out who it was. The spotlight hunts for its target as the voice resounds through the speakers: 'I am Gerardo and I'm here.' In that context, Gerardo is referring to his exact location. Now, if Gerardo happened to be a name notoriously known to belog to a public enemy, say, someone like Unabomber, and if his mere presence at the convention, say, in Washington DC, meant a threat par excellence, he'd be much more likely to have said: I am Gerardo and I am here. In that context, Gerardo is referring to his general presence at the convention, not to his exact location.

So, both the constructions have their distinctions, even if they be only pragmatic.

-1

No, both are same..I'm is the contracted form of : I am

This contracted form is used in informal communication..

  • Why the downvote? – egrunin Sep 23 '13 at 18:43
  • @ egrunin : You downvoted so you only explain.. – Sweet72 Sep 23 '13 at 18:44
  • 2
    (it was my downvote) No, they're not "the same". Among other differences, I'm is informal, and it's more common in speech than writing regardless of formality. Plus "I am" can stand alone as a two-word reply to a question (from someone asking whether you're a native speaker or not, for example). But you definitely can't simply reply "I'm" in such a context. – FumbleFingers Sep 23 '13 at 18:46
  • 2
    In addition to what @FumbleFingers says, I'd say that it's a contracted form if I am, not an abbreviated form. And while the two may be the same in meaning, they are not the same in usage. As an example, I wouldn't proclaim: "I think therefore I'm." – J.R. Sep 23 '13 at 19:38
  • 1
    A contraction is an abbreviation. And I am is invariably stressed, and usually alone, in speech. If it's spoken normally, it's always I'm. So saying I am in a normal sentence is already marking yourself as not a native speaker. In writing, you should write what you say, though people who paid too much attention in third grade find it hard to use contractions in writing. – John Lawler Sep 23 '13 at 21:35

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.