A corpus-based study on the “ungrammatical” <i>aren't I</i>

Abstract Concerning the “ungrammatical” interrogative form aren't I , many scholars have made their points. However, these scholars’ arguments are based on their personal observations and few studies have examined this phenomenon against large corpora. This study aimed at investigating the widespread usage of “ungrammatical” contraction form aren't I in question tags from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Based on large corpora, this study showed a clear picture of the current frequency of use of the question tags aren't I and other alternatives ( amn't I , ain't I , am I not and an't I ) in modern English. From a qualitative perspective, this study found that the reason why aren't I has taken hold as a recognized standard form around the globe lies in that the use of aren't I appears to be a smart coincidence to imply the potential double roles of “I” as both the addresser and the addressee in a monologue. In addition, the fact of the matter that amn't I is difficult to pronounce, am I not is bookish, an't I is old-fashioned and ain't I can only be used in informal situations, increases the popularity of aren't I . The findings of this study can justify the usage of “ungrammatical” aren't I as a natural norm in both British English and American English. These findings open new research avenues alongside pedagogical and sociolinguistic implications for other similar “ungrammatical” language phenomenon.