Cannot: Why one word? (can't vs. cannot vs. can not)

[Tom]

Dear All

All the auxiliary verbs are written as two words when they appear with not, i.e should not, may not, ought not etc. Why is CANNOT written as one word? Again its past is two words, COULD NOT.

Thanks in advance

Tom

[Yankee]

Hi Tom

I blame this on the British.

Seriously, though, it's probably better not to ask and simply accept that that's just the way it is. I'm not sure even Alan will be able to explain the logic of "cannot" as a single word.

Amy
_________________
Amy
.
ESL teacher, translator, and a native speaker of American English

[Alan]

Hi Tom,

You can write this as two words: can not and that's something you can't/cannot do with the other modals. As Amy has issued the challenge, I'll have a go at the logic? As you know, English lends itself/adapts iteslf well to the lazy speaker and it's much easier to say: can't/ won't/mustn't/oughtn't/mayn't/coudn't etc than to give them the full value as: will not/must not and so on. But it so happens that the modal can ends in an 'n' and that makes it uniique and what more natural than to put the two n's together and make it cannot just to show that you know the full form and you are not using the abbreviation. Now, you cannot/can not/ can't argue with that, can you?

Alan
_________________
English as a Second Language
You can read my ESL story Word Story: Weather

[Tom]

Thank you a lot, Alan.

To sum up, can I treat it as two words "CAN NOT"?

Tom

[Yankee]

Hi Alan

Thanks for your explanation! That seems quite plausible to me.

Hi Tom

You should write "cannot" in most cases. My advice would be to reserve "can not" (2 words) for emphatic situations.

Amy
_________________
Amy
.
ESL teacher, translator, and a native speaker of American English

[Jamie (K)]

I see a distinction:

You can't follow orders.
You cannot follow orders.
= You are not able to follow orders.

If you add the word always to these sentences, you get:

You cannot always follow orders.
You can't always follow orders.
= It is not always possible to follow orders.

It is also possible to say:

You can not follow orders.
= You can ignore or disobey orders. You can listen to the order and not follow it.

If you add always to that sentence, you get:

You can always not follow orders.
= It is always possible for you not to follow orders.

The distinction is between [can't] follow or [cannnot] follow and can [not follow]. The last one may be a bit colloquial, but we do say it.