2

Recently, one of my relatives started studying the English Language and she came to discuss that the contraction of there are can also be written as the're because that's they way she learnt it at school. I am assuming this new contraction is wrong, but I am not a native English speaker and I studied English grammar long time ago, so I would like to know if this new form is right or wrong. I base my assumption on the following points:

  1. The contraction of there are is there're but it is rarely used because of the double /r/ pronunciation.
  2. According to the answer from Is "there're" (similar to "there's") a correct contraction? , the contraction there're is correct but it is more often to use there's.

All suggestions and examples are welcome :)

  • 2
    You can pronounce the contracted form of there are as there (although most people don't), but the spelling should be "there're". – Peter Shor Mar 21 '15 at 21:50
  • Yep, "there're" is pronounced roughly "there-ur", though the "ur" part is highly truncated and often completely swallowed. – Hot Licks Mar 21 '15 at 22:21
  • "There's" is more common only because the subject of a sentence is more commonly singular. In writing, use "there're" to replace "there are" and "there's" to replace "there is". – Brian Hitchcock Mar 22 '15 at 8:42
2

The short answer is no; there is no contraction such as the're. I am sure it is a misunderstanding.

  • So, if this is a misunderstanding I should talk with the teacher or do something since many colleagues from my relative are learning this "new" contraction. – abautista Mar 22 '15 at 1:03
  • Yes, I assert with certainty that there is no such contraction. Alas, I cannot prescribe a course of action to correct your relative's mistake. – Abe Mar 22 '15 at 3:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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