It's from the Middle English verb wollen which is an archaic form of the verb will. Won't in Middle English was wonnot. Answer from excelatesl on reddit.com
🌐
Southern Living
southernliving.com › news › why-is-will-not-conjunction-wont
The Reason The Contraction For Will Not Isn't "Willn't"
December 15, 2023 - A consensus wasn't reached until the 16th century when wil ultimately became will, and wold became our would. As RD points out, however, the most popular negative verb form remained woll not. This contracted to wonnot, which modern English later ...
🌐
Reader's Digest
rd.com › knowledge › grammar & spelling
Why the Contraction for "Will Not" Isn’t “Willn’t”
June 12, 2025 - Adams agrees. “We’ve got evidence in the 16th century of will not becoming woll not with an o,” he says. “We even have examples from that period of a form that we would recognize today: wonnot, which shows how it’s going in the direction ...
🌐
Grammarly
grammarly.com › blog › commonly-confused-words › wont-vs-wont
Wont vs won’t - Learn the Difference | Grammarly
May 22, 2019 - When we say won’t, we are actually saying will not. The form with the apostrophe is a contraction, like “don’t” and “can’t.” We owe the “o” in won’t to a sixteenth-century form of the word: wonnot.
Top answer
1 of 6
47

Wiktionary says:

Abbreviation of wollnot or woll + not, negations of archaic form of will.

The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology agrees:

XVII. contr. of wonnot, assim. of wol not

As to other forms, Etymonline only mentions wynnot:

first recorded mid-15c. as wynnot, later wonnot (1580s) before the modern form [won't] emerged 1660s.

2 of 6
42

Won’t actually has a pretty interesting and complex history. Ultimately it does come from a contraction of will and not, but it all happened in a rather roundabout way.

It all started off with the Old English verb willan/wyllan, meaning to will, wish, or want. Even in Old English it was used occasionally to denote a future intent. “Ic wille gan” could mean “I want to go” or “I will go”, depending on context.

Now, the thing about negatives in Old English is that they were often reduced:

na(w)ðer = nahwæðer = ne + hwæðer
neither = not + whether

næfre = ne + æfre
never = not + ever

nabbað = ne + habbað
haven’t = have + not

We nabbað naðor ne hlaf ne wæter.
We have neither bread nor water.

Not comes from naht via noht. Related to nawiht meaning naught, it originally meant in no way, but came to be used as an emphatic form of ne. Subsequently it became unstressed and supplanted ne altogether. This is an example of Jespersen’s Cycle.

All these things combined led to a new negative form of willan, wynnot. The past forms of willan began with wold-, which is where we get would. Under the influence of these forms and the related verb wol, wynnot became wonnot by the late 1500s.

Finally, the modern form won’t emerged by the 1660s as a result of reducing the final vowel in wonnot. It appears to be the first word so contracted; most of the other -n’t contractions we use today (can’t, couldn’t, shouldn’t, &c.) arose in the 1700s, modelled after won’t. In modern English, cannot is the only uncontracted -not compound that survives.

As for the other contractions such as -’ll and -’ve, their history is just as long, though perhaps slightly less convoluted. But that’s a story for a different question. ;)

Also, remember that spelling in Old English was less standardised than in modern English. There were often several equally valid ways to spell the same word, especially when you took different accents and dialects into account. So sometimes it’s difficult to get a good historical account of pronunciation and usage changes. Still, as far as I can tell, this is basically how it went down.

Source: The Online Etymology Dictionary.

🌐
Quora
quora.com › Why-isnt-willnt-a-word-It-could-easily-be-a-contraction-of-will-and-not-I-dunno-just-a-thought
Why isn't 'willn't' a word? It could easily be a contraction of 'will' and 'not.' I dunno, just a thought. - Quora
Answer (1 of 8): as Andrew Finklehouse, George Lord Jr DC and others have said, “because it’s won’t” And there’s a reason why it’s “won’t”, a historical phonological reason. The sequence of high front vowel /i/, lateral liquid vocalic /l/, and alveolar nasal /n/ is complex and unstable.
🌐
Brainly
brainly.com › english › high school › what is the contraction of 'will not'? 1) will not 2) willn't 3) won'tn't 4) willn'tn't
[FREE] What is the contraction of 'will not'? 1) will not 2) willn't 3) won'tn't 4) willn'tn't - brainly.com
Answered by NishaRathod•20.4K answers•2.4M people helped ... The contraction of 'will not' is 'won't'. It is commonly accepted in English, even though its formation is not immediately obvious.
🌐
ProWritingAid
prowritingaid.com › wont-vs-won-t
Wont vs. Won’t: What’s the Difference?
May 8, 2022 - Won’t with an apostrophe is a contraction of the words “will not.” Wont without an apostrophe means “accustomed” or “a habit.”
Find elsewhere
🌐
Reddit
reddit.com › r/etymology › how did "will not" become "won't"?
r/etymology on Reddit: How did "will not" become "won't"?
May 4, 2019 - The past forms of willan began with wold-, which is where we get would. Under the influence of these forms and the related verb wol, wynnot became wonnot by the late 1500s. Finally, the modern form won’t emerged by the 1660s as a result of reducing the final vowel in wonnot. It appears to be the first word so contracted; most of the other -n’t contractions we use today (can’t, couldn’t, shouldn’t, &c.) arose in the 1700s, modelled after won’t.
🌐
Motivated Grammar
motivatedgrammar.wordpress.com › 2008 › 04 › 03 › preposterous-apostrophes-vii-why-wont-willnt-work
Preposterous Apostrophes VII: Why Won’t Willn’t Work? | Motivated Grammar
April 4, 2008 - Generally, though, speakers just added not after whatever form of will/woll/welle/ool they were using. This type of negation, used with the woll variant, led to the amalgam wonnot and eventually got further reduced orthographically to forms like wo’not or won’t. So that gives us won’t as a contraction meaning the same as will not (and, you’ll note, the apostrophe is correctly placed to indicate omission of no from wonnot).
🌐
The Straight Dope
straightdope.com › 21342852 › why-is-em-won-t-em-the-contraction-of-em-will-not-em
Why is won’t the contraction of will not? - The Straight Dope
July 28, 2020 - Actually, it’s because the future tense of the word be, in Old and Middle English, changed with first, second and third person, singular and plural, formal and informal. (All variations are from the Oxford English Dictionary.) The first and third person present forms have shifted among wile, willo, uillo, will, wulle, wule, wolle, woll, and wool for a millenium. The second person went from wilt to wult to woot before becoming obsolete. The plural was something like willen for a bit there.
🌐
Mental Floss
mentalfloss.com › home › big questions
Why Does 'Will Not' Become 'Won't'?
December 5, 2023 - Most contractions in English are pretty straightforward: they are becomes they’re; he would is shortened to he’d; is not is isn’t; and we will is squeezed into we’ll. The two words join together, minus a few sounds. Put it together, and shorten it up. What could be easier? But that isn’t the case for will not, which becomes won’t instead of willn’t.
🌐
Brainly
brainly.com › medicine › college › choose the correct contraction for "will not." a. willn't b. weren't c. wouldn't d. wasn't e. won't
[FREE] Choose the correct contraction for "will not." A. willn't B. weren't C. wouldn't D. wasn't E. won't - brainly.com
The correct contraction for 'will not' is 'won't'. This contraction combines the words 'will' and 'not', replacing the letter 'o' in 'not' with an apostrophe. Contractions are often used in both spoken and written English to make sentences shorter ...
🌐
Turito
turito.com › home › english › contractions with not
Contractions With Not: Definition and Examples | Turito
March 8, 2025 - A contraction with not is a type of contraction where we combine not words. For ex: Where both the first- and second-word changes - will not to won't.
🌐
Grammarphobia
grammarphobia.com › home › english language › why “won’t” isn’t “willn’t”
The Grammarphobia Blog: Why “won’t” isn’t “willn’t”
March 8, 2013 - Q: I was having a conversation with one of my co-workers about “won’t” and grabbed my office copy of Woe Is I to resolve the issue, only to find (or fail to find) that the use of this word is not explained in the book. Can you render an opinion as to its acceptability? A: “Won’t” is a perfectly acceptable contraction of “will” and “not.” However, it’s an odd bird that’s been condemned at times for not looking quite like other contractions.
🌐
GCFGlobal
edu.gcfglobal.org › en › grammar › contractions › 1
Grammar: Contractions
Here are some of the contractions you'll see the most: You might have noticed that the word won't is a little different from the other contractions. It means will not, even though the word will isn't there.
🌐
Tomtorluemke
tomtorluemke.com › write-the-contracted-form-of-will-not
Write the Contracted Form of Will Not | tomtorluemke.com tomtorluemke.com
All you need to do is remove the letters “ill” from “will” and add an apostrophe in their place. The word “not” then follows right after the apostrophe. The contracted form of “will not” is “won’t.”
🌐
BBC
bbc.co.uk › worldservice › learningenglish › grammar › learnit › learnitv184.shtml
Learning English | BBC World Service
negative auxilliary verbs: contracted forms: pronunciation · Yasmeen from Portugal writes: