1541 C'ntr'ct'n

You gotta wonder sometimes about our great English language. It's certainly one of the most flexible and dynamic of languages. Able to grow and accept new words like "neeto" "keen" and "for shizzle." But that flexibility has led to some inconsistencies as well. Like with contractions.
You have your your and your you're with an apostrophe, which is, of course, a contraction for you are. And then you have a word like “bo'sun,” b-o-apostrophe-s-u-n- which is a contraction for the longer word b-o-a-t-s-w-a-i-n-. Which for some reason is not pronounced boatswain but is pronounced bo'sun. Which as a contraction leaves out many of the original letters but also adds a different vowel altogether.
Then you have the word "don't" which is a contraction for "do not." Shouldn't it be pronounced "doont." Shouldn't keeps its should sound. As does wouldn't. Would not. Wouldn't. Simple.
But what about "won't"? That one won't fly at all. It's a contraction for will not. I won't go to the store means I will not go to the store. Shouldn't it be willn't?
And then they have the nerve to say the word "ain't" ain't right to use. If "won't" is good enough for "will not", "ain't" is perfectly fine for "am not." And I am not kidding. Admit it, "I ain't kidding" would sound so much better.
But let's forget about contractions. How about we at least get some consistency with plurals. You have a roof and you have some roofs. But if you have more than one hoof then you have hooves.
And if you have more than one reef you have reefs. But if you have more than one leaf you have the plural leaves.
Except when I singularly say, "Commentary's over so like a tree it's time for me to leave."
America, ya gotta love it.