 |
 | 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 / August 2004Sank/sunk, shrank/shrunk: a new view
Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over from shrank, stunk from stank etc. The general view seems to be that this process has occurred in only one direction: over time, the -a- forms are lost and eventually we'll all be using -u- forms for the past tense. However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, shrank and sank were regarded as obsolete back then! It seems to me that English usage follows a cycle; many of the -a- forms go out of use, then they're revived by grammarians. One verb which bucked the trend was 'drink', for which 'drank' was used for the past participle as well as the preterite. I remember reading a post which implied that this was a new trend ... BEGIN, v.i. pret. began; pp. begun DRINK, v.i. pret. and pp. drank. Old pret. and pp. drunk; pp. drunken. In the definition of drunk, a usage note says: [Note. Drunk was formerly used as the participle of drink; as, he had drunk wine. But in modern usage, drank has taken its place; and drunk is now used chiefly as an adjective.] (The OED makes reference to drank as p.p. but marks it as having become obsolete in the 19th century) RING, v.t. pret. and pp. rung. SHRINK, v.i. pret. and pp. shrunk. the old pret. shrank and pp. shrunken are nearly obsolete. STINK, v.i. pret. stank or stunk. SING, v. i. pret. sung, sang; pp. sung. SINK, v. i. pret. sunk; pp. id. The old pret. sank is nearly obsolete. SPIN, v.t. pret. and pp. spun. Span is not used. (N.B. 'span' was very common in 19th century Britain) SWIM, v.i. (pret. and pp. details missing but definitions of SWUM and SWAM indicate: pret. swam or swum, pp. swum). > However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the > situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, > shrank and sank were regarded as obsolete back then! You have to remember that Webster was not just recording the English language, he was trying to change it - from what he would have regarded as patriotic motives. Mind you, his hatred of the English language was exceeded by some New Englanders: "So deeply was it rooted, that in the rebellion of the colonies a member of that State seriously proposed to Congress the putting down of the English language by law, and decreeing the universal adoption of the Hebrew in its stead." (Cunningham (ed), Jonson's Works, vol. 2, p. 33)  SignatureJohn Briggs > > However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the > > situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > language, he was trying to change it - from what he would have regarded as > patriotic motives. However, I don't think that any of Webster's preferred forms weren't in regular use at the time of publication! A look through the OED confirms that many verb forms weren't settled; the -u- forms often coexisted with the -a- forms. Subsequently the iau pattern usually won out (shrink/ shrank/ shrunk, drink/ drank/ drunk) although there were some exceptions (spin/ spun/ spun, wring/ wrung/ wrung etc.) Now it seems to me that old Webster is having the last laugh; the pendulum is now swinging back to many of his 1828 preferences including shrunk, stunk, sprung etc. as past tenses and even drank as a past participle. > > However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the > > situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > language, he was trying to change it - from what he would have regarded as > patriotic motives. I've seen such a claim exaggerated. too. I'd say he was trying to claim legitimacy for the American variant, more than change what Americans did. Changing attitudes more than usage. > Mind you, his hatred of the English language was exceeded by some New > Englanders: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > language by law, and decreeing the universal adoption of the Hebrew in its > stead." (Cunningham (ed), Jonson's Works, vol. 2, p. 33) You got any more on that? It certainly couldn't have come from Ben Jonson, who died when the New England settlers were still building their cabins. It sounds rather like the distorted legend about German being recommended as an official language, for which we have a link to the actual events, somewhere... Yes, the old link we have for that article doesn't work, but it is still to be found at: http://tafkac.org/language/german_us_official_lang.html Best wishes from the road -- Donna Richoux >>> However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the >>> situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Jonson, who died when the New England settlers were still building > their cabins. What more do you want? I've given you the page number! I don't have that edition to hand (Francis Cunningham, 1871) The comment is, of course, by the editor - he is annotating a line in "The Alchemist" (1610): Ananias [the deacon]: "All's heathen but the Hebrew." > It sounds rather like the distorted legend about German > being recommended as an official language, for which we have a link to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://tafkac.org/language/german_us_official_lang.html Unless you can document the story before 1871, the Hebrew has priority :-) SignatureJohn Briggs > > "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > >> Mind you, his hatred of the English language was exceeded by some New > >> Englanders: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > What more do you want? I've given you the page number! I was hoping you had the book, so you could tell me what "it" was that was rooted, and which was "that State." If you knew the era, even better. However, you appear to be quoting someone else's quote, so you can't. >I don't have that > edition to hand (Francis Cunningham, 1871) The comment is, of course, by the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Unless you can document the story before 1871, the Hebrew has priority :-) I beg your pardon? I thought I was doing pretty well to come up with the German link, on a strange computer and all. Now you think there is some importance to finding out whether the distorted versions mentioning German are earlier than the distorted versions mentioning Hebrew? Oh, all right, Cecil Adams and the Straight Dope come up with a fuller summary at http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_026.html including: The Muhlenberg story was widely publicized by Franz Loher in his 1847 History and Achievements of the Germans in America... SignatureBest wishes -- Donna Richoux >>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I was hoping you had the book, so you could tell me what "it" was that > was rooted, The Puritans' superstitious reverence for Hebrew. > and which was "that State." I don't I'm afraid. > If you knew the era, even > better. From the early seventeenth century into the late eighteenth century, it would appear :-) > However, you appear to be quoting someone else's quote, so you > can't. I'm quoting from Bardsley's "Curiosities of Puritan Nomenclature", since you ask. SignatureJohn Briggs > >>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > The Puritans' superstitious reverence for Hebrew. It wasn't just the Puritans who deeply revered Hebrew. Going back to the Protestant Reformation, educated Europeans considered the study of Hebrew necessary for a proper understanding of scriptural knowledge. (Many scholars considered Hebrew to be the language of Adam, or at least the closest remaining link to the divine tongue.) In the American colonies, Hebrew continued to be accorded great importance -- its study was mandatory at Harvard and Yale, and most of the founding fathers were proficient in reading the language. Here's something else from the alt.folklore.urban archives, which might substantiate the Cunningham quote: http://tafkac.org/books/the_story_of_english.html The following quote is from "The Story of English" by Robert McCrum, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil. I have the "first American edition", published in 1986 by Viking Penguin Inc. ISBN 0-670-80467-3 pg. 239: According to the Marquis de Chastellux, who traveled with George Washington in the 1780s, some Americans "propose introducing a new language; and some persons were desirous, for the convenience of the public, that _Hebrew_ should be substituted for English..." Other patriots proposed to revenge themselves on England by adopting French. One or two hot-headed legislators even toyed with the idea of adopting Greek. This proposal was rejected on the grounds that "it would be more convenient for us to keep the language as it was, and make the English speak Greek." > > and which was "that State." > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > From the early seventeenth century into the late eighteenth century, it > would appear :-) Perhaps Donna meant the era in which the Cunningham quotation appeared? Francis Cunningham's _The Works of Ben Jonson_ (3 volumes, re-edited from Gifford's 9-volume edition) was first published in 1871. Cunningham (1820-1875), son of the Scottish poet Allan Cunningham, served as an army colonel in India. > > >>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > > > The Puritans' superstitious reverence for Hebrew. > It wasn't just the Puritans who deeply revered Hebrew. Going back to > the Protestant Reformation, educated Europeans considered the study [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > importance -- its study was mandatory at Harvard and Yale, and most > of the founding fathers were proficient in reading the language. O that the American colonists had adopted Hebrew as their language! Mind ye, the current kerfuffle agin Islam would probably have hotted up a lot earlier. > Here's something else from the alt.folklore.urban archives, which > might substantiate the Cunningham quote: > http://tafkac.org/books/the_story_of_english.html > The following quote is from "The Story of English" by Robert > McCrum, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil. I have the "first > American edition", published in 1986 by Viking Penguin Inc. ISBN > 0-670-80467-3 > pg. 239: > According to the Marquis de Chastellux, who traveled with George > Washington in the 1780s, some Americans "propose introducing a new [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > grounds that "it would be more convenient for us to keep the > language as it was, and make the English speak Greek." Interesting observation in that US English now stands in much the same juxtaposition to English as Roman Latin did to Greek. > > > > and which was "that State." [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > From the early seventeenth century into the late eighteenth > > century, it would appear :-) > Perhaps Donna meant the era in which the Cunningham quotation > appeared? Francis Cunningham's _The Works of Ben Jonson_ (3 volumes, > re-edited from Gifford's 9-volume edition) was first published in > 1871. Cunningham (1820-1875), son of the Scottish poet Allan > Cunningham, served as an army colonel in India. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/gay/03-0.htm Three wave haiku <snip> >> According to the Marquis de Chastellux, who traveled with George >>Washington in the 1780s, some Americans "propose introducing a new [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Interesting observation in that US English now stands in much the same > juxtaposition to English as Roman Latin did to Greek. Except that Latin didn't derive from the speech of greek settlers in Italy - unless you count Aeneas as recounted in the Aeneid (even if some modern studies suggest that the Trojans weren't of Greek extraction). Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > <snip> > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > some modern studies suggest that the Trojans weren't of Greek > extraction). No, not entirely. But then, if you consider modern USAmerican patterns and pronunciation, it seems to owe a very great deal to non-English languages -- in particular, Deutsch, Dutch, Yiddish, and American Spanish, but also the many immigrant languages. However, the point was that the Romans superseded the Greeks in terms of power and of influence of a language which did incorporate very much of the various Greek dialects. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/60-0.htm One potato, two potato, three potato, four . . . The chicken's turning carrotwheels across the kitchen floor <snip> > No, not entirely. But then, if you consider modern USAmerican patterns > and pronunciation, it seems to owe a very great deal to non-English > languages -- in particular, Deutsch, Dutch, Yiddish, and American > Spanish, but also the many immigrant languages. I've always felt that many American accents reflect aspects of the regional accents in the areas the original English-speaking colonists came from. We should never forget that English as spoken in Britain has changed quite considerably over the centuries too. Even what is regarded as RP has changed dramatically in my lifetime - just look at any British film from the period beteween the 1930s and the 1950s and compare the RP accents with those regarded as RP today. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan ><snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >regional accents in the areas the original English-speaking colonists >came from. There is no question about it. The Eastern Shore is one place where they still retain the accent of the people they descended from, even back to that time. I was struck yesterday by the Irish accents, even hearing distinctively North Ireland ones, in a film centred on the American West. I am quite sure the director got it right. How does one explain the accent heard in Boston? Settled by Englishmen in grand New England, but do any English people talk as they do? SignatureCharles Riggs >><snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > How does one explain the accent heard in Boston? Settled by Englishmen > in grand New England, but do any English people talk as they do? I don't think so. That part of the country was originally settled by lots of folks from East Anglia. Present-day traditionalist[1] East Anglia accents, however (the ones I heard in a collection of accent samples on some website), sound nothing (to me) like Eastern (or Western) New England accents or any other present-day American accent. [1]Pre-Estuarization, I mean (NTTAWWE). In uk.culture.language.english Areff <me@privacy.net> wrote: >> How does one explain the accent heard in Boston? Settled by Englishmen >> in grand New England, but do any English people talk as they do? > I don't think so. That part of the country was originally settled by lots > of folks from East Anglia. Present-day traditionalist[1] East Anglia > accents, however (the ones I heard in a collection of accent samples on > some website), sound nothing (to me) like Eastern (or Western) New England > accents or any other present-day American accent. The accents have had three hunded years or so to diverge. Nevertheless, when I lived in East Anglia a few years back, I could certainly hear traces of American in the accents there. The nasal twang, the caught/cot merger, the mute/moot merges - all there in East Anglian English. Matthew Huntbach > The accents have had three hunded years or so to diverge. Nevertheless, when > I lived in East Anglia a few years back, I could certainly hear traces of > American in the accents there. The nasal twang, I dunno -- don't 'different' accents often (though not always) have some sort of perceived "nasal twang" to the listener? I think of Southern and Western US accents as being nasal-twangy, while I think Westerners and Southerners regard East Coast accents as nasal-twangy. Most British accents don't sound nasal-twangy to me, with the exception of Estuary English and its close kindred. > the caught/cot merger, Say what? I thought there was caught/cot merger in Scotland only. If there's been caught/cot merger in East Anglia for a long time, perhaps that would explain its presence in Eastern New England (seems unlikely). > the > mute/moot merges - all there in East Anglian English. But there is no mute/moot merger in American English. "Mute" is /mjut/ and "moot" is /mut/. > In uk.culture.language.english Areff <me@privacy.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > American in the accents there. The nasal twang, the caught/cot merger, the > mute/moot merges - all there in East Anglian English. But the new/noo thing exists in Leicestershire and, I think, in Nottingham too. SignatureRob Bannister > > In uk.culture.language.english Areff <me@privacy.net> wrote: > > > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > But the new/noo thing exists in Leicestershire and, I think, in > Nottingham too. Over the last year, I've been looking up the locations of the various English villages where my Massachusetts and Connecticut forebears emigrated from in the 1600s, over twenty so far, and they're literally all over the map, from Cumbria down to Kent. More south than north, but not particularly east. So although this is not a scientific sample, I can't say that I see any particular East Anglia [1] bias, nor any other region of England. Though I have vague recollections of hearing this thing about East Anglia, too. All I can think of at the moment is that Thomas Paine came from there, not that he spent very many years in the US. [1] Defining East Anglia as Norfolk and Suffolk. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux An American living in the Netherlands > Over the last year, I've been looking up the locations of the various > English villages where my Massachusetts and Connecticut forebears [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > can't say that I see any particular East Anglia [1] bias, nor any other > region of England. Ah, but were your forebears from Eastern or Western New England? (Let's say that the Connecticut River divides the two, and also that all of coastal Connecticut (down to the New York State border), for about 10 miles inland, belongs to the East too. IDDWT, TDBD!) > Though I have vague recollections of hearing this thing about East > Anglia, too. All I can think of at the moment is that Thomas Paine came > from there, not that he spent very many years in the US. Aren't an extremely large number of the (eastern) Massachusetts town names taken from place names in East Anglia? That has to mean something. I don't believe that carries over into western Massachusetts, does it? Totally different region. The Wild West of its day. It might be like an Australia sort of thing, where the very earliest waves of settlement had enough cultural dominance to cement features of the accent, and being just 5 or 10 years late meant you'd lose out. Look at all the Australians who are descended from 19th-century Irish immigrants, the Hogans and Moylans and such, but the basic Aussie accent is quite obviously an archaic form of Cockney (= RonE 'cockney'), more or less. There's probably some village in England somewhere where people have New York accents. (Gotham?) > [1] Defining East Anglia as Norfolk and Suffolk. That should annoy everyone in Essex :-) SignatureJohn Briggs > > [1] Defining East Anglia as Norfolk and Suffolk. > > That should annoy everyone in Essex :-) Oh, dear, is it disputed? I did check two references, such as: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001. East Anglia kingdom of Anglo-Saxon England, comprising the modern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk. ... But even if I add Essex to East Anglia, I still only get two of those (approx.) twenty immigrant families coming from there. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux "Donna Richoux" <trio@euronet.nl> wrote... > > > [1] Defining East Anglia as Norfolk and Suffolk. > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > But even if I add Essex to East Anglia, I still only get two of those > (approx.) twenty immigrant families coming from there. I was also going to dispute your definition! Your reference was correct for the historical term, but nowadays East Anglia is thought of as the whole bulge of land from the Wash down to the Thames Estuary; this certainly includes most of Essex, and also parts of Cambridgeshire. Matti > "Donna Richoux" <trio@euronet.nl> wrote... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Estuary; this certainly includes most of Essex, and also parts of > Cambridgeshire. East Angular? That's abroad. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford >>"Donna Richoux" <trio@euronet.nl> wrote... >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > East Angular? That's abroad. I suppose that Holland is abroad. SignatureRob Bannister On Wednesday, in article <cfuftu$vo8$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au> > > East Angular? That's abroad. Methinks you've been "whooshed". The above sentence was supposedly opined by a particularly thick-witted bimbo in one of the interminable series of a ghastly "reality TV" program named "Big Brother" (last year's series, or even the one before). > I suppose that Holland is abroad. No, Holland is part of the County of Lincoln (which is adjacent to East Anglia). Or are you very subtly hinting at the fact the the originator of the aforementioned Big Brother programme was indeed a TV station in The Netherlands? SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi- national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet software and decent hardware support." > On Wednesday, in article <cfuftu$vo8$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > aforementioned Big Brother programme was indeed a TV station in The > Netherlands? I've never watched BB. I sort of count that part of Lincolnshire that close to the Wash as East Anglia too. Wonder if there are East Prefects, Consuls, Zephyrs and Zodiacs to complete the set. SignatureRob Bannister >On Wednesday, in article <cfuftu$vo8$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au> > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >series of a ghastly "reality TV" program named "Big Brother" (last >year's series, or even the one before). According to what I saw of the bimbo she was not "particularly thick-witted". However, she was stunningly ignorant of geography, and other matters. She not only admitted that - she insisted on it. After she came out of the Big Brother house she played up to her reputation for dimness and stupidity. Being able to do that requires a degree of mental ability and self-awareness that the really thick-witted do not have. She seems to have missed out on an effective education (family problems) and has undeveloped potential. Sadly there are many other people of whom the same can be said. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) >> On Wednesday, in article <cfuftu$vo8$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au> >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > problems) and has undeveloped potential. Sadly there are many other > people of whom the same can be said. And now, sadly, she's a millionairess with her own company and a permanent invite to C-list events. If only she'd stuck it out at school she could have been a checkout supervisor at Waitrose. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford >> She seems to have missed out on an effective education (family >> problems) and has undeveloped potential. Sadly there are many other [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >If only she'd stuck it out at school she could have been a checkout >supervisor at Waitrose. Yes. It's tragic the way things sometimes turn out! SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) John Dean typed thus: > And now, sadly, she's a millionairess with her own company and a > permanent invite to C-list events. > If only she'd stuck it out at school she could have been a checkout > supervisor at Waitrose. Am I alone in disliking "invite" as a noun? It right sets me off, it does. SignatureDavid ===== > John Dean typed thus: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Am I alone in disliking "invite" as a noun? It right sets me off, it > does. Alright, I'll stop using it for awhile. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford On Thursday, in article <cg2o5r$tpp$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk> > > Am I alone in disliking "invite" as a noun? It right sets me off, it > > does. > > Alright, I'll stop using it for awhile. I think he'd be happier if you stopped using it for aninvitation. BICBW. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi- national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet software and decent hardware support." >> John Dean typed thus: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Alright, I'll stop using it for awhile. I had thought this was one of the awfuler Americanisms, but not so. Both Merriam-Webster and the OED have it going all the way back to 1659, which amazes me, and originating in England, which amazes me even more. The OED lists it as a colloquialism. Isn't it unusual for a word that's been around this long to still not have made it into literature? This is what the OED has for its first usage: 1659 H. L'Estrange Alliance Div. Off. 326 Bishop Cranmer+gives him an earnest invite to England. SignatureCharles Riggs > >> John Dean typed thus: > >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > 1659, which amazes me, and originating in England, which amazes me > even more.[...] You're still, at your time of life, amazed that the English can tastelessly bastardize their language? This particular spurious offspring was in a Guardian headline but yesterday. "Kill! Kill!!" I cry to my pack of wolfhounds. OK, to make David's day, let's remind him of the full enormonty: "Ta for the invite". Mike. Mike Lyle typed thus: > > >> John Dean typed thus: > > >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > OK, to make David's day, let's remind him of the full enormonty: "Ta > for the invite". At its cringe inducing worst in (the otherwise admirable) Mott The Hoople's _Roll Away the Stone_: There's a rockabilly party on Saturday night Are you gonna be there? (Well I got my invite) Gonna bring your records? (Ohh, will do) Yuk, yuk, yuk. SignatureDavid ===== >From: Charles Riggs chriggs@eircom.net >Date: 8/19/2004 9:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >1659 H. L'Estrange Alliance Div. Off. 326 Bishop Cranmer+gives him an >earnest invite to England. So, it's one of the awfuler Englandisms. > John Dean typed thus: > > And now, sadly, she's a millionairess with her own company and a > > permanent invite to C-list events. > > If only she'd stuck it out at school she could have been a checkout > > supervisor at Waitrose. > Am I alone in disliking "invite" as a noun? It right sets me off, it > does. Has to be preferable to "invitation" as a verb. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/ada/07-0.htm Haddocks are sensitive fish... In uk.culture.language.english Robert Bannister <robban@it.net.au> wrote: >> The accents have had three hunded years or so to diverge. Nevertheless, when >> I lived in East Anglia a few years back, I could certainly hear traces of >> American in the accents there. The nasal twang, the caught/cot merger, the >> mute/moot merges - all there in East Anglian English. > But the new/noo thing exists in Leicestershire and, I think, in > Nottingham too. Yes, but that's still the eastern side of England. The point I was making here is that while it's not found across American English, it is (I am open to correction if I am wrong) a feature of New England English, and that was the specific thing we were discussing. Matthew Huntbach > In uk.culture.language.english Robert Bannister <robban@it.net.au> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > to correction if I am wrong) a feature of New England English, and that was > the specific thing we were discussing. I think loss of /j/ in "new" is indeed a feature of most American English, but loss of /j/ in "mute" isn't. The preceding consonant is significant - Americans tend to have not /j/ after /t/, /d/ and /n/, but do have /j/ after labials and velars in words like "cue", "few", "beautiful" and "mute". On the other hand, East Anglians (and some East Midlanders) have lost /j/ after _all_ consonants, including words like "beautiful" (hence those "bootiful" turkey adverts) and "mute". Where in East Anglia did you here a cot/caught merger? I've not heard of that one, and it doesn't seem to be mentioned on this Norfolk dialect page: http://www.poppyland.co.uk/dialect.htm (NB: contains sound files and is slow to load; also I think it's meant to be read with a book, but it's possible to make some sense of it without.) Jonathan In uk.culture.language.english Jonathan Jordan <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> wrote: > Where in East Anglia did you here a cot/caught merger? I've not heard > of that one, and it doesn't seem to be mentioned on this Norfolk > dialect page: > http://www.poppyland.co.uk/dialect.htm I lived in Norwich for a while, but it was quite some years ago. I do recall strange things happening with the short-o which seemed to me to be on the way to American English. Maybe it's what the page refers to as the "East Anglian short o". Matthew Huntbach > In uk.culture.language.english Jonathan Jordan <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > way to American English. Maybe it's what the page refers to as the "East > Anglian short o". Don't we all do something like it, though lengthened, when attempting rustic English speech, or "Mummerset"? "Ooh, Gahd, ah! Oi caht 'un in me cahtt@ge!" Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as "Cuvventry". We still, of course, have that officially in many words such as "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". Mike. >> In uk.culture.language.english Jonathan Jordan <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > rustic English speech, or "Mummerset"? "Ooh, Gahd, ah! Oi caht 'un in > me cahtt@ge!" That pernts to cot/father merger, however, which does not imply cot/caught merger. Thing is, Eastern New England is the one region in the US (MOLPAD) where you *don't* have cot/father merger! > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as > "Cuvventry". <blink> What's the modern RP way of saying "Coventry"? I don't have much call to use the word (and far I am from RP), but if I did, "Cuvventry" is what I would say. > We still, of course, have that officially in many words such as > "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". On the other hand, I say "covert" to rhyme with "overt": "coe vert". Not like "cover" plus "t". -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > call to use the word (and far I am from RP), but if I did, "Cuvventry" is > what I would say. Like "poverty," if I've followed past discussions right. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >> Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I >> take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >On the other hand, I say "covert" to rhyme with "overt": "coe vert". Not >like "cover" plus "t". I would use the former for spookish activities, but the latter for the thing pheasants, or foxes, or whatever, live in. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". "Don Aitken" <don-aitken@freeuk.com> wrote... > >> Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- > >> I take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I would use the former for spookish activities, but the latter for the > thing pheasants, or foxes, or whatever, live in. As would I. Except that, for the former, NSOED gives the stress on the first syllable, not the second one, and I think this is a pondial distinction. Matti >> Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I >> take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >call to use the word (and far I am from RP), but if I did, "Cuvventry" is >what I would say. Like "constable" etc., the spelling pronuciation has pretty well taken over -- ['kA.vn-trI]. >> We still, of course, have that officially in many words such as >> "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". > >On the other hand, I say "covert" to rhyme with "overt": "coe vert". Not >like "cover" plus "t". Another victory for speak-as-you-spell. David >>>Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I >>>take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Another victory for speak-as-you-spell. I'm not so certain about that - it could reflect regional differences in pronunciation. There is considereable regional variation in the pronunciation of vowel sounds and pairs of vowel sounds that are more or less identical in one area may be quite distinct in another. REgsards, Einde O'Callaghan >>On the other hand, I say "covert" to rhyme with "overt": "coe vert". Not >>like "cover" plus "t". > > Another victory for speak-as-you-spell. But I spell "covert" like "cover" plus "t". I think it's actually an analogy by related meanings: the pronunciation of "overt" influenced the pronunciation of "covert", in much the same way that the pronunciation of "male", once upon a time, influenced the pronunciation of "female". -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > call to use the word (and far I am from RP), but if I did, "Cuvventry" is > what I would say. Not exactly RP, but I say /'kA.v@ntSrI/ ("cot" vowel). I'm not convinced that the wigh that Brummies sigh it has anything to do with the old-fashioned RP pronunciation. There are plenty of examples of <ov> in English being /Vv/. Jonathan On 18-Aug-2004, "Jonathan Jordan" <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> wrote in message <2oggfqFaeiqhU1@uni-berlin.de>: > > > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- > > > I take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Not exactly RP, but I say /'kA.v@ntSrI/ ("cot" vowel). You actually have *phonemic*, not just phonetic, /S/ here? Someone just asked about <try> = /tSrai/ in misc.education.language.english; I thought they were probably just hearing some audible friction in the post-alveolar/pre-palatal region as a natural consequence of allophonically aspirated /t/ followed by alveolar/retroflex approximant /r/. [...] SignatureJim Heckman > On 18-Aug-2004, "Jonathan Jordan" <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> > wrote in message <2oggfqFaeiqhU1@uni-berlin.de>: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > allophonically aspirated /t/ followed by alveolar/retroflex > approximant /r/. Well, the affricate /tS/ (or /c^/ for those who prefer that notation) and no /t/ or /S/, but yes, that's how I perceive it. Similarly /tSraI/ "try", /dZraI/ "dry", /StSrit/ "street". I can use real /tr/ and /dr/ in some names of non-English origin - it seems a bit odd to me to use my English "tr" which feels to me like /tSr/ in, say, "Trieste". Jonathan On 19-Aug-2004, "Jonathan Jordan" <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> wrote in message <2oj5gsFb87gdU1@uni-berlin.de>: > > On 18-Aug-2004, "Jonathan Jordan" <jonathan.jordan@sheffield.ac.uk> > > wrote in message <2oggfqFaeiqhU1@uni-berlin.de>: [re: "Coventry"] > > > Not exactly RP, but I say /'kA.v@ntSrI/ ("cot" vowel). > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > and no /t/ or /S/, but yes, that's how I perceive it. Similarly > /tSraI/ "try", /dZraI/ "dry", /StSrit/ "street". ?! /StSrit/ with initial /S/ ?! Wow. > I can use real /tr/ and /dr/ in some names of non-English origin - it > seems a bit odd to me to use my English "tr" which feels to me like > /tSr/ in, say, "Trieste". Thanks. IIRC, you're from around Sheffield (as per your e-mail address) but have said you don't have a strong regional accent. Do you have any feel for how widespread this <tr> = /tSr/, <dr> = /dZr/ phenomenon is among British accents? SignatureJim Heckman > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as > "Cuvventry". We still, of course, have that officially in many words > such as "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". Huh? Surely you mean "covet"? I'd assumed that "Bovey" rhymed (more or less) with "coney". I've always thought guidebooks to the various English-speaking countries should include the pronunciation of place-names as a matter of course. Not foolproof, but useful. SignatureAndrew Gw. If this one double-posts, go tell it to our Porsche-driving friends at Google. > > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as > > "Cuvventry". We still, of course, have that officially in many words > > such as "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". > > Huh? Surely you mean "covet"? That, too! And, in answer to earlier posters, I use the same pron for spooky stuff as for pheasant stuff. Aaron, lad, stick with "Cuvventry", and we won't send you there (Br allusion, perhaps impenetrable overseas). > I'd assumed that "Bovey" rhymed (more or less) with "coney". I've > always thought guidebooks to the various English-speaking countries > should include the pronunciation of place-names as a matter of course. > Not foolproof, but useful. Yes, they should. And it is "buvvy". Interestingly, though, the Devonshire surname "Tovey" may be heard in both realizations: in my own experience, native Devonians use the long o. A friend of that name, from Bristol as it happens, said it that way, while his up-country wife (now mercifully ex) tried to make everybody say "tuvvy" on what we thought were risible Hyacinth Bucket/Bouquet principles. On that tangent, I suppose I should mention that my brother was at Blundell's with neighbours who really were called "Bouquet", and they pronounced it more-or-less French-style, while their housemaster always said "bOkay". Mike. > > Then there's the very short one round Brum way, which gave rise -- I > > take it -- to the old-style RP way of saying "Coventry" as > > "Cuvventry". We still, of course, have that officially in many words > > such as "covert", "dove", and "Bovey Tracey". > > Huh? Surely you mean "covet"? That, too! And, in answer to earlier posters, I use the same pron for spooky stuff as for pheasant stuff. Aaron, lad, stick with "Cuvventry", and we won't send you there (Br allusion, perhaps impenetrable overseas). > I'd assumed that "Bovey" rhymed (more or less) with "coney". I've > always thought guidebooks to the various English-speaking countries > should include the pronunciation of place-names as a matter of course. > Not foolproof, but useful. Yes, they should. And it is "buvvy". Interestingly, though, the Devonshire surname "Tovey" may be heard in both realizations: in my own experience, native Devonians use the long o. A friend of that name, from Bristol as it happens, said it that way, while his up-country wife (now mercifully ex) tried to make everybody say "tuvvy" on what we thought were risible Hyacinth Bucket/Bouquet principles. On that tangent, my brother was at Blundell's with neighbours who really were called "Bouquet", and they pronounced it more-or-less French-style, while their housemaster always said "bOkay". Mike. > On that tangent, my brother was at Blundell's with neighbours who > really were called "Bouquet", and they pronounced it more-or-less > French-style, while their housemaster always said "bOkay". Ain't nowt so queer as folk. I once heard a conversation on a crowded Tube train where a couple of people having a not-very private conversation, and one referred to the Essex town of Theydon Bois as if it were French (complete with nasal vowel!); it's pronounced as "Theydan Boyce", with the "th" being the sound in "thistle". There were a lot of people around them trying to keep a straight face... SignatureAndrew Gwilliam To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" > it's pronounced as "Theydan Boyce", Well you learn something every day. I always thought it was pronounced "Bwuh". Though I can't remember the last time I ever heard the name spoken. I suppose it's like Bevois Valley in So'ton (Beevis), or Belvoir Castle near Nottingham (Beaver). Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >>it's pronounced as "Theydan Boyce", > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Cheers > Tony In the East End [of London] there's Plaistow (Plahstow), a bit of a shibboleth. And when they merged the county boroughs of East Ham and West Ham to make the London Borough of Newham, we had to put up with BBC News insisting on pronouncing it "properly", ie as if it were "New Ham"; in fact it's New-um. [East/West Ham though are pronounced as written; and yes, Newham was a neologism.] SignatureAndrew Gwilliam To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" At 05:20:19 on Thu, 19 Aug 2004, Andrew Gwilliam <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote in <41242a85$0$58816$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>: >Ain't nowt so queer as folk. I once heard a conversation on a crowded >Tube train where a couple of people having a not-very private >conversation, and one referred to the Essex town of Theydon Bois as if >it were French (complete with nasal vowel!); it's pronounced as >"Theydan Boyce", with the "th" being the sound in "thistle". There >were a lot of people around them trying to keep a straight face... Reminds me of the time I heard someone pronounce the latter part of the name of the Sussex town Herstmonceux[1] (which should be Herst-m'n-zoo) in the French style, as though it were Herst-mong-coeur). [1] Yes, you have heard of it. Think Royal Greenwich Observatory. 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.) > At 05:20:19 on Thu, 19 Aug 2004, Andrew Gwilliam > <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > [1] Yes, you have heard of it. Think Royal Greenwich Observatory. Now Queen's University, Hailsham. SignatureJohn Briggs >Subject: Re: Sank/sunk, shrank/shrunk swim/swam/swum swum? Sure sounds weird, even if they did do it a lot at the Olympics. >>Subject: Re: Sank/sunk, shrank/shrunk > > swim/swam/swum > > swum? Sure sounds weird, even if they did do it a lot at the Olympics. "Have swam" would sound even weirder to me - or do you have another suggestion for the past participle? - "swom", "swimmed" or what? Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > >>Subject: Re: Sank/sunk, shrank/shrunk > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "Have swam" would sound even weirder to me - or do you have another > suggestion for the past participle? - "swom", "swimmed" or what? Me missus just suggested "swimmen". Well, that's swimmen for you. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/60-cupluv.htm Should your powers of love diminish, So you fear that pleasure's finish... >From: David david@dacha.freeuk.com Einde O'Callaghan >> >>Subject: Re: Sank/sunk, shrank/shrunk >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Well, that's swimmen for you. LOL! oops...burst out laughing...scared the dog. I've been a swimmer all my medium-long life, and never used 'swum'. Look what I've been missing! Liza swum swimmingly. >> On that tangent, my brother was at Blundell's with neighbours who >> really were called "Bouquet", and they pronounced it more-or-less [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Boyce", with the "th" being the sound in "thistle". There were a lot of > people around them trying to keep a straight face... When I lived in Woodford, we always gave 'Bois' 2 syllables: 'boy-eess'. I wonder how the people you overheard mangled Hainault? SignatureRob Bannister > When I lived in Woodford, we always gave 'Bois' 2 syllables: 'boy-eess'. > I wonder how the people you overheard mangled Hainault? So what is it, if it isn't Hayno? And does everyone drive a Renno? Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >>When I lived in Woodford, we always gave 'Bois' 2 syllables: 'boy-eess'. >>I wonder how the people you overheard mangled Hainault? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Cheers > Tony Hay-nalt, where "nalt" rhymes with "halt". But I still drive a Renno. SignatureAndrew Gwilliam To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" >>>I wonder how the people you overheard mangled Hainault? >> So what is it, if it isn't Hayno? And does everyone drive a Renno? >Hay-nalt, where "nalt" rhymes with "halt". But I still drive a Renno. Or Eye-nowt, if you live rahn there. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>>>I wonder how the people you overheard mangled Hainault? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Or Eye-nowt, if you live rahn there. Nah, sgo'a be 'ay-nawt may'. 's wickid round there, n'ah a mean? [nA: sgo?@ bi ?eI.nO:? meI? swI.kId r&:nd DE@ nA.?@.mi:n] Translation supplied upon request. SignatureAndrew Gwilliam To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" >From: Andrew Gwilliam bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk >Date: 8/20/2004 1:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Translation supplied upon request. Request translation. > >From: Andrew Gwilliam bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk > >Nah, sgo'a be 'ay-nawt may'. 's wickid round there, n'ah a mean? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > Request translation. No, it's got to be Hainault, mate. It's wicked round there, know what I mean? Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org On Friday, in article <2o356tF5q75qU1@uni-berlin.de> einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de "Einde O'Callaghan" wrote: > I've always felt that many American accents reflect aspects of the > regional accents in the areas the original English-speaking colonists [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > film from the period beteween the 1930s and the 1950s and compare the RP > accents with those regarded as RP today. My ex-wife comes from deepest Essex; she was (when I was married to her, and, she assures me, still is) mistaken for an Australian by all sorts of people (including genuine Australians, when she's visited that fair continent: albeit that they always think she comes from a different state). I attribute this to the fact that the prison hulks were drawn up on the Essex marshes, and that the transportees spent many months (sometimes years) assimilating the local accent before making the voyage. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi- national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet software and decent hardware support." >My ex-wife comes from deepest Essex; she was (when I was married to her, >and, she assures me, still is) mistaken for an Australian by all sorts of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Essex marshes, and that the transportees spent many months (sometimes >years) assimilating the local accent before making the voyage. I still can't believe in my heart that an acquaintance who claims to have spent his whole life in and around St Albans (Hertfordshire, England) isn't Australian. Maybe he just hasn't stolen that sheep yet. SignaturePaul In bocca al Lupo! > I still can't believe in my heart that an acquaintance who claims to > have spent his whole life in and around St Albans (Hertfordshire, > England) isn't Australian. Maybe he just hasn't stolen that sheep > yet. Aha! A Wolff in sheep's clue thing. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/11-0.htm "I don't remember my death, of course," said the Dalai Lama. Joachim nodded his understanding. [snip] > It wasn't just the Puritans who deeply revered Hebrew. Going back to > the Protestant Reformation, educated Europeans considered the study of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > was mandatory at Harvard and Yale, and most of the founding fathers were > proficient in reading the language. I vaguely recall a story about a late-mediaeval or early-modern European ruler ordering some infants to be raised in silence, under the belief that they would naturally speak Hebrew if their minds weren't 'contaminated' by post-Babel language. Needless to say, the experiment was unsuccessful. SignatureOdysseus > I vaguely recall a story about a late-mediaeval or early-modern > European ruler ordering some infants to be raised in silence, under > the belief that they would naturally speak Hebrew if their minds > weren't 'contaminated' by post-Babel language. Needless to say, the > experiment was unsuccessful. It's been discussed in a.u.e a few times. One version of the legend relates to Frederick II of the Holy Roman Empire, and the other to King Psammetichus of Egypt. Some old accounts are given here: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/ling620/origins.html SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux > [snip] > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > weren't 'contaminated' by post-Babel language. Needless to say, the > experiment was unsuccessful. The father ofPrinz Moritz of Anhalt-Dessau , cousin of Fred the Great , decreed that he not be taught or schooled in any way but he was taught to speak. Prinz Moritz learned to read and write after a fashion although he was famous for bad spelling and grammar. He did become an excellent infantry commander and general. > > I vaguely recall a story about a late-mediaeval or early-modern > > European ruler ordering some infants to be raised in silence, under [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > was famous for bad spelling and grammar. He did become an excellent > infantry commander and general. I find biographical material on the prince and field marshal Moritz of Anhalt-Dessau (1712-1760), a general for Frederick the Great, but nothing mentions his education. Can you tell me where you heard this? I'm always interested to hear another "unschooled celebrity" story, although I've learned that the facts often turn out to be distorted. Anyway, I don't think you can put the two in the same breath -- choosing to educate your child in a markedly different manner than the prevailing fashion (like Thomas Edison's mother did, for example), vs. preventing infants from hearing speech at all. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux > > > I vaguely recall a story about a late-mediaeval or early-modern > > > European ruler ordering some infants to be raised in silence, under [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > fashion (like Thomas Edison's mother did, for example), vs. preventing > infants from hearing speech at all. It is recounted in the book " The Military life of Frederick the Great" by Col. Trevor Dupuy U.S.Army {ret} an excellent book of Freddy's campaigns. > However, a look through Webster's 1828 dictionary proves that the > situation is more complex. What really surprised me is that rang, > shrank and sank were regarded as obsolete back then! It seems to me > that English usage follows a cycle; many of the -a- forms go out of > use, then they're revived by grammarians. Sure, but you have to remember that many of the posters, I am one, are older and remember correct grammar quite well. Webster was a New Englander, and is suspect on that basis alone. Have you ever heard a New Englander speak? Not something which inspres confidence in his language skills. But seriously, generally a native speaker learns the language from his mother. That mother learned from her mother; etc. The evolution of the language is slow. And the more educated a person is, the more his language is on the trailing edge. I do not believe that "grammarians" revive older forms. I believe they are just holding on to the forms they learned as a young child. GFH > Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a > gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > that English usage follows a cycle; many of the -a- forms go out of > use, then they're revived by grammarians. I'm intrigued by the similarity in German, and I regret I don't know, and am too lazy to check whether any of these forms have changed: trinken, trank, getrunken (drink, drank, drunk) ringen, rang, gerungen (wrestle or wring) stinken, stank, gestunken (stink, stank, stunk) singen, sang, gesungen (sing, sang, sung) sinken, sank, gesunken (sink, sank, sunk) spinnen, spann, gesponnen (spin, span, spun) schwimmen, schwamm, geschwommen (swim, swam, swum) A pretty close correspondence with only 'shrink' missing and very similar vowel changes. SignatureRob Bannister >> Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a >> gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > spinnen, spann, gesponnen (spin, span, spun) > schwimmen, schwamm, geschwommen (swim, swam, swum) Looks good to me. > A pretty close correspondence with only 'shrink' missing and very > similar vowel changes. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a > > gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > A pretty close correspondence with only 'shrink' missing and very > similar vowel changes. I have to admit when I am among family and getting questionable verb forms mixed up (highlighted? highlit?) that I start making up strange pseudo-German verbs (hat gehighlitten) to emphasize their irregularity or strangeness. My family tends to look at me strangely when I do this, and for good reason. Kimberly S. > > Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a > > gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I'm intrigued by the similarity in German, and I regret I don't know, > and am too lazy to check whether any of these forms have changed: Insert: beginnen, begann, begonnen (begin, began, begun) > trinken, trank, getrunken (drink, drank, drunk) > ringen, rang, gerungen (wrestle or wring) [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > A pretty close correspondence with only 'shrink' missing and very > similar vowel changes. > > > Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a > > > gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > sinken, sank, gesunken (sink, sank, sunk) > > spinnen, spann, gesponnen (spin, span, spun) Insert also: springen, sprang, gesprungen (spring, sprang, sprung) > > schwimmen, schwamm, geschwommen (swim, swam, swum) > > > > A pretty close correspondence with only 'shrink' missing and very > > similar vowel changes. > > Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a > > gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over > > from shrank, stunk from stank etc. How about sh.t? Is it sh.t, shat, shut or sh.t, shat, had shatted? >>>Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a >>>gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over >>>from shrank, stunk from stank etc. > > How about sh.t? > Is it sh.t, shat, shut or sh.t, shat, had shatted? No it's sh.t, sh.t, sh.t - like hit, hit, hit - although I've occasionally heard shat as the past tense and even the past participle, but usuually only for a slightly comic effect. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan >>>>Over the last few years there have been quite a few posts lamenting a >>>>gradual loss of past tenses in -a-; for example, shrunk is taking over [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >occasionally heard shat as the past tense and even the past participle, >but usuually only for a slightly comic effect. I go with sh.t, shat, shat. It's a strong verb in German too - I think it goes scheissen, schiss (?), geschissen. I have problems talking in German about shooting, where the verb is schiessen, schoss (?), geschossen. A pregnant pause before every past participle, while I double check. Totally OT, and not wanting to overdo this subject, in German the preposition 'in' takes the dative unless there is, um, motion involved, when it takes the accusative. Sure enough, when I was told a boy had shat in his bed, the statement was "Er hat ins Bett geschissen!" ('ins' is accusative, = 'in das'). I was mighty impressed. SignaturePaul In bocca al Lupo! |
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.