Talk:j'ai

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

j'ai

Same reasons as #n'est. Is simply j' + ai. --Keene 15:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep j'ai, keep n'est. Also keep au, du, and des, as well as al and similar. —Stephen 18:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Delete - we've tended to delete contractions in English. --EncycloPetey 02:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Since we’re native speakers of English, it’s not so important to have English contractions (although we should). Those of us who do not know much French, Spanish, Portuguese or Italian might actually wish to find out what some of these very common words mean. —Stephen 06:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Isn't j'ai pretty much a match for I've? We wouldn't get rid of that one, I'm sure. Of course, the difference is that you could write "I have" instead of I've, but you can't write "je ai" instead of j'ai, as it would be incorrect. bd2412 T 15:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep per these examples. DAVilla 01:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep. Very common. And anyway, a contracted word is still a single word and so we should have an entry for it. The definition only has to say "contraction of je + ai", I don't see the problem. Widsith 11:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course keep - ALL words in ALL languages. SemperBlotto 11:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Weak delete. This is SOP, with (deprecated template usage) j'- being one of its parts. The comparison to (deprecated template usage) I've is flawed, because (deprecated template usage) -'ve is mostly restricted to a handful of contractions, usually being written (deprecated template usage) have in other cases (even when pronounced Template:IPchar), whereas (deprecated template usage) j'- is simply a form of (deprecated template usage) je used in a broad swath of contexts. However, it does look like a word to English speakers, and it's incredibly common, so I'm not going to be all militant about it. —Ruakh_TALK 00:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep, in case my comment above does not clearly convey my direction. I would agree with deleted, for example, j'attends or j'apparais, even though they are correct, because they are just not as fundamental to the language; but avoir is one of the two basic combining forms for creating compound tenses, and j'ai is therefore exceedingly common in French speech. bd2412 T 03:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)