"I should have gone to that show."
"I should have went to that show."
While the first example is certainly "correct English" isn’t the second example a useage that is traceable to persons in certan areas of the US? Perhaps those from old Scots / Irish roots?
Not being able to contribute very usefully here, I just want to mention that the hoopoe in Swedish is härfågel, of uncertain origin. Other names are upupa (Latin), épops (Greek), haerpop (Danish): the Linnaean name is Upupa epops. Those names are said to be suggested by the strange mating call of the bird, so, welcome, mate.
"You shouldn’t oughta say ‘ain’t’, Joey, that’s bad grammar." (Dennis the Menace)
I’ve noticed there is a lot of confusion between some irregular pasts and past participles in the United States (around Chicago, where I lived for one year and where I come back every year to visit my host family). The examples I can think of are You (should) have saw, You (should) have began and You (should) have swam. Notable are the confusions between a past tense with an a, such as swam, and a past participle with a u, such as swum. I’ve read in the Times Writer’s Guide that people should watch out for them and not fall in that common trap.
What is interesting also is that there may be uncertainies whether to use this or that form of past tense (also there are differing opinions according to different scholars). Just a few verbs to illustrate: shrank or shrunk for the past, stank or stunk for the past, bit or bitten for the past, sank or sunk for the past, knit or knitted for the past and past participle, bet or betted for the past and past participle and sweat or sweated for the past and past participle.
-You saw. You should have seen this first.
-You began. You should have begun earlier.
-You swam. You should have swum something smaller before attempting the English Channel.
The sweater shrank; however, it should not have shrunk according to the label.
The vampire bit her. If he had any sense, he would not have bitten a garlic-loving chef.
The ship sank. The ship would not have sunk if not for striking the sunken iceburg.
gailr Of course, there’s no accounting for how they talk in Chicago. Some of them musta not went to English comp class, from what I’ve heard when slipping over the state line. :D
[quote author=KatyBr link=board=grammar;num=1094051058;start=0#7 date=09/02/04 at 12:39:24]...and this with variations:"He gave me two reasons, he did." This instant reiteration of subject and verb….. I wanna Scream! I do.
My two-year-old does this, she does. Of course, in her, it’s cute.
Her constant inquisitions ("Why?"), on the other hand… That drives me crazy, it does.
This reminds me of a Californian guy who came to visit a friend of mine whom he had hosted, back in the States.
We were heading for some well-known bar in town and the conversation turned to "beer sorts". The fact is that he corrected me when I said: "I have never drunk that kind of beer" by repeating in his place: "I have never [I]drinken[/I]". I couldn’t help telling him that I hadn’t been studying English for 8 years, not to know such a common verb as "to drink". He logically replied that he had spoken English everyday for more than 8 years…
He meant that "drunk" was merely an adjectif, not a past participle. I had never heard nor did I later hear such thing as "drinken", not even speaking with USians. However, we settled the matter by saying that it was a probable difference between American and British English.
This kind of variation from standard English grammar is so common that I don’t think it can be tied down to any one particular dialect.
Regular verbs (the good majority) use the -ed form of the verb to form the past tense (‘I played’) and the past participle (‘I have played’). There are around 300 irregular verbs (depending on how you count them). Some irregulars have different forms for the past tense (‘I took’) and the past participle (‘I have taken’); others use the same form for both constructions, but do not use the regular -ed form (‘I kept’: ‘I have kept’).
Many non-standard grammars bring ‘doubly’ irregular verbs into line with the regular verbs. Often the standard past participle is used for the past tense: ‘I seen’, ‘I come [past]’. In other cases the levelling goes the other way: ‘I have went’. There is a strong historical tide that pulls verbs towards regularity. It is the same common sense that makes a child proudly say ‘I drawed you a picture’. However, some dialects cling to archaic forms that standard English has regularised. In Darlington, where I used to live, it is usual to say ‘They tret me very well’. In other dialects ‘I writ the letter yesterday’ is perfectly normal.
The verb do comes in for particular notice in British English dialects. Its standard conjugation is do [present], did [past] and done [past part.]. However, some dialects conjugate the full verb as dos, done and done; the auxiliary, thus, is do and did. For example:
‘He dos it, do he?’
‘He done it, did he?’
I’ve never heard of drinken—I was hoping Garzo the Great would remark about its presence in his territory.
However… Along the same lines as "should’ve went", many folks do say dranken or drunken as the past participle form of drink. This is not standard English, to my knowledge; the correct past participle is simply drunk.
Also, I’ve heard the term drunken as an adjective…
I wonder how many ways there are to form a past tense/participle.
1. The -ed form (played).
2. The -en form (taken).
3. Vowel gradation (took).
4. Irregular endings, often in -t (sent).
5. No change (cut).
6. Vowel gradation and the -en form (broken).
7. Vowel gradation and the irregular -t (slept).
8. Double vowel gradation (sang).
I can’t think of any other ways to do it. There’s always the temptation to use the wrong form. Some verbs use a special form for certain participial adjectives - ‘I drink too much’, ‘she drank too much’, ‘we have drunk too much’, ‘they are the drunken louts’. Likewise, sunken treasure is treasure that has sunk, and a shrunken shirt has shrunk in the wash. This only happens in standard English to a handful of verbs that go through double vowel gradation. However, it is more common in non-standard English. My auntie calls a cake that she didn’t make herself a boughten cake.
I just think your Californian friend was totally arrogant. How could he correct you if he knew no better? That just proves to me how stupid he is, since he has spoken English his entire lifetime and still hasn’t learned it right. I don’t think that everybody has to know everything there’s to know about everything, but in his particular case, I think he missed a great chance to just keep quiet.
[quote author=Brazilian_dude link=board=grammar;num=1094051058;start=0#14 date=09/02/04 at 22:01:07]I don’t think that everybody has to know everything there’s to know about everything, but in his particular case, I think he missed a great chance to just keep quiet.
Never underestimate a ‘typical relative’: familiarity can breed a whole lot of stuff. The more I look at non-standard grammars, the more I discover that there are subtleties there that may be missed in standard grammar. British English has a quite subtle distinction between the dynamic and stative uses of ‘have’ that is rapidly disappearing.
