 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / September 2009Viewn
viewn Do you use this "word"? I've assembled a few examples from Google Groups and Books searches. http://dadge.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/viewn/ Adrian Adrian Bailey: > viewn > Do you use this "word"? Never heard of it before.  SignatureMark Brader | Could it be that this law has nothing to do with law, justice, Toronto | morality, liberty, or foreign trade, and everything to do with msb@vex.net | politics? Shame on me for being so cynical. -- Morley Safer > Adrian Bailey: >> viewn >> Do you use this "word"? > > Never heard of it before. Neither have I, in 60-odd years of speaking, reading and writing English. Is it perhaps an obsolete form of "view"? > > Adrian Bailey: > >> viewn [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Neither have I, in 60-odd years of speaking, reading and writing > English. Is it perhaps an obsolete form of "view"? Neither have I. But I'd recognize and understand it if anybody used it. It's just an archaicized version of the past participle of 'view', rather like 'seen', and probably formed and retained by analogy with it. I don't actually know whether it's actually archaic or just phony-archaic, like 'dove', but it doesn't really matter. It's certainly strange, no matter. -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler "A man does not know what he is saying until he knows what he is not saying." -- G.K. Chesterton, 1936, "As I Was Saying" >> > Adrian Bailey: >> >> viewn [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > phony-archaic, like 'dove', but it doesn't really matter. It's > certainly strange, no matter. The OED doesn't list it or have it in any quotations, but I do see one pre-twentieth-century hit on Google Books: At the commencement of this pamphlet it was pointed out how much injury a town sustained from such a course of proceeding, without accompanying it with the brighter side of the picture, but as we have now seen that Southampton deserves a high reputation for health, it can well afford the darker side to be viewn... Edwin Wing, _Southampton Considered as a Resort for Invalids_, 1848 There are also a couple of recent ones (1998 and 2003). SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The whole idea of our government is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |this: if enough people get together Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and act in concert, they can take |something and not pay for it. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | P.J. O'Rourke (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > Adrian Bailey: > > viewn > > Do you use this "word"? > > Never heard of it before. Nor of I. Normally such forms arise by analogy with similar-sounding words, but the only one I can think of offhand is "hewn", which isn't terribly common. One that's always baffled me is "snuck". If that's the past tense of anything, it ought to be "snick", not "sneak". You occasionally hear it over here now, although I think it's generally regarded as an Americanism. -- Guy Barry Guy Barry: > One that's always baffled me is "snuck". If that's the past tense of > anything, it ought to be "snick", not "sneak". You occasionally hear it > over here now, although I think it's generally regarded as an Americanism. It still sounds substandard to me, but it seems to have gained considerable acceptance. I heard it used on the CTV National news tonight, for example. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "Ah. I am now confused at a much more msb@vex.net | advanced level, thank you." --Mike Lyle Mark Brader filted: >Guy Barry: >> One that's always baffled me is "snuck". If that's the past tense of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >considerable acceptance. I heard it used on the CTV National news >tonight, for example. It's been years since I've snought....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > > Never heard of it before. > > Nor of I. That should be "nor have I", of course. Strange slip - I don't normally say "would of"! -- Guy Barry Mark Brader: >>> Never heard of it before. Guy Barry: >> Nor of I. > That should be "nor have I", of course... Oh. I thought you meant "nor of me". :-) SignatureMark Brader | "I couldn't imagine what Americans did at night Toronto | when they weren't writing novels." msb@vex.net | --Joseph Heller Sat, 26 Sep 2009 07:48:57 +0100 from Guy Barry <guy.barry@blueyonder.co.uk>: > One that's always baffled me is "snuck". If that's the past tense of > anything, it ought to be "snick", not "sneak". You occasionally hear it > over here now, although I think it's generally regarded as an Americanism. Are there any legitimate -ee- or -ea- verbs that form a past or participle in -u- ? "Snuck" has been around since at least my childhood, *mumble* years ago. I'd think it was formed by analogy with some other verb, but I can't think of one. SignatureStan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Shikata ga nai... > Are there any legitimate -ee- or -ea- verbs that form a past or > participle in -u- ? "Snuck" has been around since at least my > childhood, *mumble* years ago. I'd think it was formed by analogy > with some other verb, but I can't think of one. Burchfield writes: "Meanwhile no one has satisfactorily accounted for its origin: there is no other verb in the language with infinitive -eek or -eak and past tense -uck. Consider the following verbs in /-i:k/: creak, freak, leak, peak, peek, reek, seek, squeak, streak, wreak, also shriek. None of them has shown any sign of following the path of 'sneak' by acquiring a new past tense form." -- Guy Barry On 26 Sep 2009, Adrian Bailey wrote > viewn > Do you use this "word"? Nope, but it doesn't feel entirely alien -- as if I've met it in dialect, probably with "chewn". It's certainly similar enough to "throw/thrown" that the meaning is immediately understandable to me. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 26 Sep 2009, Adrian Bailey wrote > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > dialect, probably with "chewn". It's certainly similar enough to > "throw/thrown" that the meaning is immediately understandable to me. And even more similar to "sew/sewn". -- Jerry Friedman > And even more similar to "sew/sewn". That doesn't rhyme with "view", though. -- Guy Barry > > And even more similar to "sew/sewn". > > That doesn't rhyme with "view", though. You have just truen. However, I'd still say "sew" is closer to "view" than "throw" is. -- Jerry Friedman |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.