Disputatio:Wasn’t

Does this word deserve an entry? I'd analyse the -n't as a clitic, so it would be something like adding an entry for every Latin noun and -que. Thoughts? --Vladisdead 14:32 nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

It deserves an entry. ... -n’t is a suffix [not a clitic] which probably deserves its own entry, but 1) it's not productive and 2) attaches to a small closed class (viz., auxiliary verbs), so we can stand to list all its derivatives as entries. Words in -n’t are pronounced differently too (with extreme cases, e.g. won’t).

Now, for something like -’s it'd be a different matter: grammaticalized, attaches to any part of speech freely ("the lion I saw yesterday's mane"), etc., wouldn't be worth listing every attachment as it's a common clitic. —Myces Tiberinus 17:37 nov 22, 2004 (UTC)