 |
 | 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 / British English / April 2004span v spun as the past of spin
I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more usual "spun" as the past tense of "spin". The US view is in accordance with their 1828 Webster dictionary: span is not used. The British reactions were much more mixed. See the following comments from the same thread: http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=bdciu2%24rgrt2%241%40 ID-103223.news.dfncis.de "I've never heard or seen [span as the past of spin] used in Britain" http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=5qnKa.35%24yt6.28%40n ews-binary.blueyonder.co.uk "To my ear, "The car span out of control" sounds much better than the same with "spun"." Question one. Why do some Britons deny that they've encountered "span" while others prefer to use it? Is there a north-south divide with "span" being used more in the north, less in the south? Question two. What's special about "span out of control"? In Web searches, this phrase did appear more often than I expected relative to the same with "spun". I carried out a word frequency survey on UK webpages and found that the overall frequency was: 8% span, 92% spun (excluding past participles e.g. the story was spun) However, the frequency for span/spun out of control came out as 22% span, 78% spun The difference seems too large to be dismissed as a statistical fluke. David Picton typed thus: > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The British reactions were much more mixed. See the following > comments from the same thread: When Adam delved and Eve span Who was then the gentleman? This is a reasonably well-known mediaeval verse, which doesn't work with spun; I'd be surprised if most educated UK English speakers had never heard it. OK, "span" is old fashioned, but that doesn't make it unknown.  SignatureDavid ===== > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more > usual "spun" as the past tense of "spin". [Snip] > Question one. Why do some Britons deny that they've encountered > "span" while others prefer to use it? Is there a north-south divide > with "span" being used more in the north, less in the south? Have you considered the possibility that northerners think southerners say "span". Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/cook/21tct-0.htm 10 Traditional Curd Tart Recipes > > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more > > usual "spun" as the past tense of "spin". > [Snip] > > Question one. Why do some Britons deny that they've encountered > > "span" while others prefer to use it? Is there a north-south divide > > with "span" being used more in the north, less in the south? > Have you considered the possibility that northerners think southerners > say "span". Found it at last: ? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/ Where subtle shades of every hue, homogenize and mellow: Pages cyan, green, and blue; and red, magenta, yellow. > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The British reactions were much more mixed. See the following > comments from the same thread: http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=bdciu2%24rgrt2%241%40 ID-103223.news.dfncis.de > "I've never heard or seen [span as the past of spin] used in Britain" http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=5qnKa.35%24yt6.28%40n ews-binary.blueyonder.co.uk > "To my ear, "The car span out of control" sounds much better than the > same with "spun"." > > Question one. Why do some Britons deny that they've encountered > "span" while others prefer to use it? Is there a north-south divide > with "span" being used more in the north, less in the south? This is a reasonable theory. > Question two. What's special about "span out of control"? In Web > searches, this phrase did appear more often than I expected relative [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 22% span, 78% spun > The difference seems too large to be dismissed as a statistical fluke. Dunno - it's weird. I might, for example, say that a spider span a web**, but I don't think I'd say that someone span thread or span a ball. Maybe all it can be put down to is that certain associations are - for whatever reason - more resistant to change than others. **What word is used in "Charlotte's Web"? I know Coldplay use "spun" in their song "Trouble" and I remember thinking it sounded a bit odd. Adrian > > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more > > usual "spun" as the past tense of "spin". > > [snip] > > http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=5qnKa.35%24yt6.28%40n ews-binary.blueyonder.co.uk > > "To my ear, "The car span out of control" sounds much better than the > > same with "spun"." [snip] > > Question two. What's special about "span out of control"? In Web > > searches, this phrase did appear more often than I expected relative > > to the same with "spun". [snip] > Dunno - it's weird. Perhaps it's one of those journalistic clichés. My guess is that a few high-profile articles used "span out of control" and it caught on, maybe because it sounds more dramatic than the "spun" version. > I might, for example, say that a spider span a web**, > but I don't think I'd say that someone span thread or span a ball. Maybe all > it can be put down to is that certain associations are - for whatever > reason - more resistant to change than others. I guess that these associations can be different for different people. I can imagine using "span" for thread because of the old stories which I heard as a child (e.g. Rumpelstiltskin "once more span the straw into gold" in some versions). > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > The British reactions were much more mixed. Compare with "ring", "rang" and "rung" for the present, past and past particple of the verb "to ring". I think you will find there is a tendency these days for "rung" to be used as the past tense as well as the past participle. In general there does seem to be a etndency for past tense and past participle to merge, particularly in irregular verbs that aren't used often enough for people to become sure of the correct form. I assume that with the verb "to spin" that tendency had already set in by the time the dictionaries were compiled. Nevertheless, I myself thought that "span" was correct, and was surprised to see my dictionary (Collins 1956) referring to it as "Arch"(aic). Of course, the Americans have famously kept the past participle of the verb "to get" where we Brits have dropped it (although it seems to be creeping back into British usage probabky due to USA influence). Matthew Huntbach At 09:40:31 on Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Matthew Huntbach <mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> wrote in <c4r9if$7io$1@beta.qmul.ac.uk>: >> I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry >> Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more >> usual "spun" as the past tense of "spin". >Compare with "ring", "rang" and "rung" for the present, past and past >particple of the verb "to ring". I think you will find there is a tendency >these days for "rung" to be used as the past tense as well as the past >participle. Which reminds me of the following, learned as a tongue-twister when I was a small child: Swim, swan, swim! The swan swam over the river. Swim, swim, swan! The swan swam back again. Well swum, swan! SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > > I've been reading with interest the reactions to the latest Harry > > Potter book in which J.K. Rowling used "span" instead of the more [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > past participle to merge, particularly in irregular verbs that aren't used > often enough for people to become sure of the correct form. This is not a new tendency. For example, we now say "stood" for the past tense of stand. According to the OED, the past participle was "standen" until the 16th century. However, there have also been movements in the other direction - towards the distinct forms. This post demonstrates this very clearly: http://www.google.co.uk/groups?q=g:thl3463504825d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF- 8&selm=rjnyxrebjypebsgpbz.gk17zn0.pminews%40news.cis.dfn.de Some verbs used to have both the -u- form and the -a- form listed as correct alternatives for the past tense, e.g. shrunk/shrank, sunk/sank, spun/span, stunk/stank. In almost all cases the -a- form is now regarded as standard for the past, with the -u- form reserved for the past participle! > I assume that with the verb "to spin" that tendency had already set in by > the time the dictionaries were compiled. There's a major pondian issue here. The 1828 Webster dictionary suggests that "span" was obsolete in the US, even then. In contrast, the examples in the OED suggest that both forms were used equally in 19th century Britain. > Nevertheless, I myself thought that "span" was > correct, and was surprised to see my dictionary (Collins 1956) referring to > it as "Arch"(aic). The Concise Oxford Dictionary used to say "archaic" but now says "chiefly archaic" which is a little vague, but more accurate. In my view there is no justification for labelling "span" as archaic in the UK. It's still current, but used less frequently than "spun". > Of course, the Americans have famously kept the past participle of the verb > "to get" where we Brits have dropped it (although it seems to be creeping > back into British usage probably due to USA influence). This is another example of a verb form which attracts unreasonable criticism. For example, the Concise Oxford Dictionary (edition 10) has this rather puzzling usage note: "The form gotten is very common in North American English, though even there it is often regarded as nonstandard." Maybe this has something to do with resistance to "gotten" in Canada. Here is an example: http://www.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&selm=886818529.754863%40michelob '"Gotten" is incorrect and is considered ghetto English in all English-speaking countries.' This is of course followed by series of replies pointing out that all the North American dictionaries list "gotten" as correct usage. But the most strongly-worded response came from Britain! http://www.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=kMR93IAJu630Ew09%40redwoo ds.demon.co.uk 'Absolute rubbish ... American English (along with Scottish) has retained the older form, but in the English of the southern half of Britain it has been replaced by "got".' [snip] > > Compare with "ring", "rang" and "rung" for the present, past and past > > particple of the verb "to ring". I think you will find there is a tendency > > these days for "rung" to be used as the past tense as well as the past > > participle. In general there does seem to be a tendency for past tense and > > past participle to merge, particularly in irregular verbs that aren't used > > often enough for people to become sure of the correct form. > However, there have also been movements in the other direction - > towards the distinct forms. This post demonstrates this very clearly: Sorry - that's the wrong post. The reference should be a little further down the thread: http://www.google.co.uk/groups?&selm=rjnyxrebjypebsgpbz.gjz3en0.pminews%40news.c is.dfn.de The conclusion: during the 20th century, verbs which allowed both the -u- and the -a- form in the past tense were mostly standardized on the -a- form. Now we have the situation where the -u- form is often used in speech e.g. I swum, but educated people know that this should be corrected to the -a- form (I swam) in standard English. I have a suspicion that some people will "correct" spun to span, with the result that its use in print will actually increase. In fact, this process may already have started. > [snip] > > > > I think you will find there is a tendency > > > these days for "rung" to be used as the past tense as well as the past > > > participle. > Now we have the situation where the -u- form is often used in speech > e.g. I swum, but educated people know that this should be corrected to > the -a- form (I swam) in standard English. I have now carried out a UK website survey which bears out this point. For swam vs swum as the past tense: 99% swam, 1% swum! This proves that there is still a strong preference for the -a- form in the written language, despite the fact that the -u- form is very common in speech. |
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.