''to regularise all English irregular verbs.''
yeah right
sneak, snuck, snuck
yeah right
sneak, snuck, snuck
Regularising the irregular
<<Wierd at first, maybe, but after some time wouldn't we get used to it? For example, would we be happy saying "help-holp-helpen"? That's how "help" used to conjugate. >>
First, regularize "wierd" to 'weird'
and "help-holp-helpen" to "help-holp-hOlpen"
I'm against any further simplification (i.e. dumbification). English is finally developing some of its own character and charm. Let's keep the old and add the new.
First, regularize "wierd" to 'weird'
and "help-holp-helpen" to "help-holp-hOlpen"
I'm against any further simplification (i.e. dumbification). English is finally developing some of its own character and charm. Let's keep the old and add the new.
<<If English wouldn't look like English, it wouldn't be English! ><
Who's English are you refering to, there?
My English looks like this, at times.
"He buyed a new coat."
When I'm in my dialect group, that is.
Who's English are you refering to, there?
My English looks like this, at times.
"He buyed a new coat."
When I'm in my dialect group, that is.
<<First, regularize "wierd" to 'weird'>>
I did. Did you miss the edit?
<<< Edit:
<<No. I don't support it because it would be weird as fuck saying shit like: >>
Weird at first, maybe, but after some time wouldn't we get used to it? For example, would we be happy saying "help-holp-holpen"? That's how "help" used to conjugate.
and "help-holp-helpen" to "help-holp-hOlpen" >>>
Do you need glasses?
I did. Did you miss the edit?
<<< Edit:
<<No. I don't support it because it would be weird as fuck saying shit like: >>
Weird at first, maybe, but after some time wouldn't we get used to it? For example, would we be happy saying "help-holp-holpen"? That's how "help" used to conjugate.
and "help-holp-helpen" to "help-holp-hOlpen" >>>
Do you need glasses?
Hello mollyb-pos old chap,
<To me, it seems sensible, a logical step, to regularise all English irregular verbs. This has already/is already being done by many English dialect speakers.>
In fact, not all movement is towards the regularisation of irregular verbs.
Thus "brung" and "thunk" have re-irregularised "brought" and "thought", for some non-standard speakers; and the past tense "text" (for "texted") has become quite common.
MrP
<To me, it seems sensible, a logical step, to regularise all English irregular verbs. This has already/is already being done by many English dialect speakers.>
In fact, not all movement is towards the regularisation of irregular verbs.
Thus "brung" and "thunk" have re-irregularised "brought" and "thought", for some non-standard speakers; and the past tense "text" (for "texted") has become quite common.
MrP
In fact, not all movement is towards the regularisation of irregular verbs.
Bad news.
Bad news.
<Bad news>
Well, "mildly diverting news", perhaps.
Anyway, people seem to manage.
MrP
Well, "mildly diverting news", perhaps.
Anyway, people seem to manage.
MrP
>>Thus "brung" and "thunk" have re-irregularised "brought" and "thought", for some non-standard speakers; and the past tense "text" (for "texted") has become quite common.<<
At least here in Wisconsin, we have the very irregular past participles "broughten", "thoughten", "caughten", and so on which are used in addition to their more standard counterparts. For some reason, though, they seem to be primarily used with verbal particles or prepositions and are not used a whole lot on their own.
At least here in Wisconsin, we have the very irregular past participles "broughten", "thoughten", "caughten", and so on which are used in addition to their more standard counterparts. For some reason, though, they seem to be primarily used with verbal particles or prepositions and are not used a whole lot on their own.
I am in a frenzy because I never can figure out whether it's supposed to be 'shit' 'shat ' or 'shitted'!
>>I am in a frenzy because I never can figure out whether it's supposed to be 'shit' 'shat ' or 'shitted'!<<
You can always use all three if you want... preterite and past participle forms in English really aren't that cut and dry in practice...
You can always use all three if you want... preterite and past participle forms in English really aren't that cut and dry in practice...
<In fact, not all movement is towards the regularisation of irregular verbs.>
Did anyone say it is?
<< This has already/is already being done by many English dialect speakers.>>
"Many" doesn't mean all, Mr P.
Did anyone say it is?
<< This has already/is already being done by many English dialect speakers.>>
"Many" doesn't mean all, Mr P.
Damian : « It would make the English Language look ridiculously unreal and too simplistic, like making it a sort of dumbed down version for the benefit of people with learning difficulties. [...] Turning English into some weird simpled form of an Anglicised Esperanto sounds too horrific for words. »
C'est pas très gentil pour l'espéranto. D'autre part l'anglais est *déjà* affecté par un dénuement morphologique fort prononcé : temps surtout périphrastiques, peu (ou pas du tout) de terminaisons verbales pour les rares temps simples, des adjectifs monomorphes, un seul article défini, pas de forme pour le pluriel de l'article indéfini etc. La régularisation des verbes irréguliers ne serait qu'un stade supplémentaire d'une évolution déjà bien amorcée et ne changerait pas grand chose à la nature de l'anglais.
C'est pas très gentil pour l'espéranto. D'autre part l'anglais est *déjà* affecté par un dénuement morphologique fort prononcé : temps surtout périphrastiques, peu (ou pas du tout) de terminaisons verbales pour les rares temps simples, des adjectifs monomorphes, un seul article défini, pas de forme pour le pluriel de l'article indéfini etc. La régularisation des verbes irréguliers ne serait qu'un stade supplémentaire d'une évolution déjà bien amorcée et ne changerait pas grand chose à la nature de l'anglais.
***So would you say that the Americans decided to change "colour" to "color", etc and use the past simple where the Brits would use the present perfect, e.g. "Did you eat yet?", was a sign of having learning difficulties in the USA?***
Don't be silly! That's a different issue altogether, and has nothing to do with what we are discussing in this thread. Read through my last posting again - with especial attention to its penultimate paragraph.
Don't be silly! That's a different issue altogether, and has nothing to do with what we are discussing in this thread. Read through my last posting again - with especial attention to its penultimate paragraph.
<Read through my last posting again - with especial attention to its penultimate paragraph. >
What does "especial" mean?
What does "especial" mean?
<<"especial">>
Isn't this just an alternative to the more usual "special".
Isn't this just an alternative to the more usual "special".