Regularization or irregular verbs
Posted: 15 April 2019 10:50 PM   [ Ignore ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  916
Joined  2013-10-14

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/10/harvard-scientists-predict-the-future-of-the-past-tense/

Concerning the article, (link above) I have noticed, primarily in speech, the common misuse of irregular verbs.
I’ve frequently detected newscasters misusing the verb, come by saying, they would have came or they had came.  Another common misused irregular verb is go, went, gone. I frequently hear, I could have went there, which grates on my nerves.  I understand that some dictionaries note that using went, as the past participle is a nonstandard usage.  Also, the past participle of drink as in, I had drunk, is commonly used in the simple past tense.

It seems that more people are regularizing irregular verbs. It also seems that fewer people can properly conjugate irregular verbs. I rarely hear anyone using the past participle of lie correctly. I had lain on the couch for a minute. Has lain become obsolete in common speech?

Regularization of irregular verbs doesn’t pain me as much as their demise; I’m just a sentimental traditionalist.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 April 2019 02:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1603
Joined  2007-02-14
Logophile - 15 April 2019 10:50 PM

I rarely hear anyone using the past participle of lie correctly. I had lain on the couch for a minute. Has lain become obsolete in common speech?

Regularization of irregular verbs doesn’t pain me as much as their demise; I’m just a sentimental traditionalist.

This one is, I think , more a case of the intransitive and strong lie being ousted by the once purely transitive, now both transitive and intransitive but still weak lay.  In my advanced age I have frequent visits to healthcare workers and am almost invariably told to “lay down on the examining table.” I’d say it’s about ten to one.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 April 2019 03:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1300
Joined  2007-03-01

I think many people genuinely don’t realise that lay and lie are two different verbs, let alone know the difference*.

As for usages like would have came and had drank, it’s possible that these are not so much errors but dialect forms that were just as prevalent in our youth but wouldn’t have been allowed in broadcasting and print.

*Random anecdote: at my prissy private all-girls junior school, the headmistress taught us to sing the Christmas carol thus:

Away in a manger / No crib for a bed / Our little Lord Jesus / Laid on his sweet head.

I asked her why on earth Baby Jesus would have been lying on his head, and she said ‘No, no, of course he wasn’t lying on his head! It’s a very old carol, and head was an old-fashioned word for hay‘. Even aged seven I wasn’t convinced, but I had just enough wit to know when to shut up, and not go on to ask next how the ‘Christmas crib’ could be a thing, if he had no crib for a bed? I was an annoying know-all child, and she didn’t like that, or me. I don’t entirely blame her (not more than 95%). But if she had minded her grammar a bit more, as she was always telling us to do, she’d have known the correct words had to be ‘laid down‘, and had no bother.

[ Edited: 16 April 2019 04:17 AM by Syntinen Laulu ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 April 2019 08:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1683
Joined  2007-03-21

But if she had minded her grammar a bit more, as she was always telling us to do, she’d have known the correct words had to be ‘laid down‘, and had no bother.

Which is how I learned it. Although, it might have been “lay down his sweet head.”

My seminary professor observed that the line “The little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes” is docetic. That wry observation was used in introduction to theology every year.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2019 08:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4134
Joined  2007-02-26

I hardly think that “have went” counts as regularisation.

Regularised, it would be “have goed”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 April 2019 08:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  916
Joined  2013-10-14
OP Tipping - 18 April 2019 08:45 PM

I hardly think that “have went” counts as regularisation.

Regularised, it would be “have goed”.

I agree; therefore, there would be quite a few irregular verbs that might not sound quite as euphonious to the ears if regularised, such as: eat, ate, eaten, but regularised would be, eat, eated, eated.

Profile