#18064
02/02/2001 4:39 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1 |
increased usage by media; acceptable?
|
|
|
#18065
02/02/2001 5:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20 |
No.
In anything even remotely formal, I'd be horrified. Maybe in play scripts or other forms that are trying to approximate speech, but sheesh...you gotta (!) draw the line somewhere...gs
|
|
|
#18066
02/02/2001 7:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear Kingfisher: I am also fed up with "wannabe".wwh
|
|
|
#18067
02/02/2001 7:56 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
Unfortunately, what the media decides to allow as "acceptable" becomes so. Yuck. 
|
|
|
#18068
02/02/2001 11:37 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
I'm gonna hafta stratein yew ot here...ya gotta no dat if it's sompin you feel strong nuf about yer gonna wanna make yer voice herd 'n stop that it's too late to change or my vote don't count crap....Yern'Merican aintcha?
Disclaimer - although I have no accent (not actually possible) there are plenty of people I know that speak as I have typed and arranged those words. There is no other way to get the whole picture (as I told the story) and "no other way" for them to communicate...
Claimer - I wrode the "L" into the Loop yesterday, and the recorded announcement clearly stated that we were approaching the Harold Washington LIBARY)! I'll bet money I could get them to change that!
|
|
|
#18069
02/04/2001 5:58 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 87
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 87 |
When has modern written English (post Samuel J) ever resembled its spoken counterpart? I mean, when a "knight" really was a "kn-icht" things were ducky. Even Pepys must have been doing alright. But, nowa daiz? Hey, who cares as long as the spell-checker (saving Aenigma), works and I can add my own idiosyncratic spellings to the list!
|
|
|
#18070
02/04/2001 6:27 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
I truly believe that these three words are approaching the designation of "contractions", which is exactly where "modern" American language seeks to "re-assemble" it's spoken counterpart, and should be allowed to continue to develop as American, not as English. (don't make me say it again) When lines are drawn, quite often it is viewed as a challenge to cross (as I know someone will to my using the word "exactly"  ). It may be more accurate to say, "draw all the lines you want, we ain't payin attention." The "media" is notorious for that.
|
|
|
#18071
02/05/2001 12:17 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 87
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 87 |
In reply to:
should be allowed to continue to develop as American, not as English
The French, at least, already do consider American and English (British) two different languages (dialects?). Books translated into French are noted on the title page as having been "translated from the English (anglais)" or "from the American."
I don't think it has to do with "drawing lines," only with the normal development of languages.
|
|
|
#18072
02/05/2001 10:24 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
At the risk of horrifying the onlookers, isn't attempting to establishing a normal process of language development "drawing lines" or "establishing roads to follow"?(eg. limiting the development of language to that which passes (through channels) to become part of a dictionary (certainly not limited to this example)). Possibly a change in formal syntactical theory is in order to go with the new words (perhaps not), however, the masses of people will drive, the few will read tire tracks...
|
|
|
#18073
02/06/2001 10:52 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393 |
I'd normally (writing colloquial dialogue) write 'going to' and say 'gonna' (actually [g@n@] with schwa), so there's no reason to make the spelling fit the pronunciation.
I'd use an alternative spelling where it was something I didn't normally contract: I use 'isn't it?' as a tag, so if I made a character say 'innit?' I'd have to write it that way.
I'm quite tempted to write 'hafta' because 'have to' just doesn't look right, and I've come across genuine cases where they contrast. Making up an example: 'the next thing I have to do'.
|
|
|
#18074
02/07/2001 11:20 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
'innit' seems to have taken over my household at the moment.
|
|
|
#18075
02/07/2001 11:24 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Everybody seems to be a "wannabe" these days. There is some comfort, at least "Zig-A-Zig Ah" got left behind in the last century.
|
|
|
#18076
02/07/2001 2:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771 |
In reply to:
There is some comfort, at least "Zig-A-Zig Ah" got left behind in the last century.
Really? Really? Really?
|
|
|
#18077
02/07/2001 6:13 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544 |
Seems many of us feel that gonna/gotta/wanna are okay spoken but not so okay when written. How does this apply to "gotten?" As in "I haven't gotten sick in a long time, but now I don't feel so good."
It strikes me as a little different from the "going to" vs. "gonna" distinction, as the tense it suggests is a bit different from simply "got." But I could just say "I haven't been sick..." Anyway - whatcha think?
|
|
|
#18078
02/08/2001 1:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
I was under the impression that "gotten" was a perfectly good word (long after being steered away from using it in school). A quick check on Webster's online lists it as "obsolescent". Hmm. I still hear it (and use it in everyday speech) a lot.
|
|
|
#18079
02/08/2001 8:03 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289 |
"Gotten" is perfectly normal usage in the U.S. for some purposes, as in "I've gotten a bit heavy lately." British usage, which I suppose heavily influences Canadian usage, would use "got" in such a sentence. However, we would not say, "I've gotten a little list." That would be "got", same as British.
|
|
|
#18080
02/08/2001 10:26 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
Just speculating on very little evidence because I don't use gotten at all, but for those who do use both would "I've gotten" refer to the result of a process that takes time while "I've got" would be used where the obtaining could be viewed as instantaneous?
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
#18081
02/08/2001 11:22 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544 |
Just speculating on very little evidence because I don't use gotten at all, but for those who do use both
would "I've gotten" refer to the result of a process that takes time while "I've got" would be used where
the obtaining could be viewed as instantaneous?
I would use them thusly:
"I've gotten a bit heavy" - does imply it's taken some time, but also that I ain't done fattening up
"I got a bit heavy" - could imply a sudden heaviness (after falling in the pool and soaking all my clothes, I got heavier - awkward example, but one doesn't often get heavy suddenly), but could also suggest something like "While living in Italy and eating lots of pasta and drinking lots of Chianti, I got pretty heavy, but have since slimmed down" (Note: true story)
|
|
|
#18082
02/08/2001 11:26 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Equally unsure of source right now, Bingley, but I thought 'gotten' was the Elizabethan form, exported to Amerikay and remaining one of those distinctive time-warped features of the USA tongue.
|
|
|
#18083
02/08/2001 11:40 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427 |
It may be only my impression, but here is what I think: "I've got" would normally be used in Britain both for the "becoming" meaning ("I've got a bit heavier lately"), and the plain "possession" meaning ("I've got a little list"). In the States, "I've gotten" would normally be used for the continuing meaning ("I've gotten a bit heavier lately"), but the possession meaning would be expressed without "got", simply as "I have a list" or "I don't have a list". This is what I have surmised from listening to Brits and USns, have I got it approximately right? No idea about Canadians or other species... 
|
|
|
#18084
02/08/2001 11:58 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 544 |
In the States, "I've gotten" would normally be used for the continuing meaning ("I've gotten a bit heavier
lately"), but the possession meaning would be expressed without "got", simply as "I have a list" or "I don't
have a list".
US'ns also use the possessive form "I've got," which brings us full circle on this thread, as it's used in "I gotta go."
Gotta go,
Hyla
p.s. Was tickled to notice that Ænigma reads gotta as gotten - maybe it's paying more attention than I thought.
|
|
|
#18085
02/09/2001 4:22 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
Perhaps I misunderstood Bobyoungbait's post, but I thought he was saying that some USians (v. themians?) use both I've got and I've gotten.
There's no problem about the difference between I've gotten heavier and I got heavier,as cited by Hyla. That's just the normal difference between past simple and present perfect. The past signifies that we're talking solely about the past and the present is not a concern while the present perfect signifies a present effect.
For those USians who do use both forms (I've gotten and I've got), what's the difference?
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
#18086
02/09/2001 5:44 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
I've looked at three different dictionaries - Websters, Merriam Websters and the COD - and they all simply describe "gotten" as one of two possible past participles of "get", the other being "got". They also all agree about the etymology, from Middle English from German. If anything, "gotten" is closer to its source than "got". Usage seems to be regional as suggested above, but the use of "gotten" is neither obsolete nor incorrect. In NZ, the use of "gotten" would be seen as unusual, but only the tuppenny linguistic police would even comment.
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#18087
02/09/2001 7:31 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 140
member
|
|
member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 140 |
distinctive time-warped features of the USA tongue. I am just returned from an increasingly desperate and, of course, unsuccessful search for Bill Bryson's Made In America which I was hoping I would be correct in referring people to as an interesting and readable account of some of the "Americanisms" which many of my countrypersons profess to despise, but which are in fact quite pure English as she was once spoke, if a little outdated in some quarters. I hope this is the book I am thinking of. ( sic) A couple of the early chapters are relevant, I think. If not, someone will enlighten us. Really, looking for a particular book in this house is like looking for ... anybody care to provide a suitable simile from their own experience? lusy 
|
|
|
#18088
02/09/2001 11:54 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
neither obsolete nor incorrectYes, I agree with you CapK - I was trying to make a non-judgmental observation that I had believed this to be an Americanism that falls into the class of traditional UK usage that had been left intact whereas in the UK (subject to less isolation for a 100 years of crucial development?) that now is definitely on the verge of being archaic or regional dialect. But it is merely an attractive difference - no slur intended.
|
|
|
#18089
02/09/2001 3:13 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289 |
Bingley, Hyla and Marianne have all pretty much gotten the idea of how the two are used. With not infrequent exceptions, we in the US do not generally use "got" to mean "have". Notwithstanding some pretty obvious usages, like, "I've got music, I've got rhythm", "I've got a loverly bunch of coconuts", "He's got the whole world in His hands", which is the possessive use, or "I've got you under my skin" which is not. On the other hand, if/when we do use "got" for the possessive, it tends to be as an emphatic expression. One would generally say, "I have two apples" rather than "I've got two apples"; but I think we would tend more to "He's got a gun pointed at you!" but "He has a gun stored in the garage." Then there's the fact that the exceptions that come to my mind are from songs; I would agree that "gotten" is unmusical and "have" is a problem for musical purposes.
So to sum up, Americans tend on the whole not to use "got" for "have" as the normal verb of possession. They use "got" as the past tense, or preterite, of "get", but generally use "gotten" as the past participle to form the perfect tense, rather than "got", which is British usage. To the preference for "have" over "got", there are exceptions, notably for emphasis, for euphony. I'm sure there will be more that will occur to you out there.
|
|
|
#18090
02/09/2001 5:15 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
More from the U.S., Bingley--
I've gotten a list--implies that I have made a bit of an effort to obtain it.
I've got a list--it's in my possession, no connotations.
I've gotten fond of blueberry pie = I've become fond...
I've got fond of...we don't say this, not ever, never.
==========================================================
looking for a particular book in this house is like looking for ... anybody care to provide a suitable simile from their own experience?
a bit in a bucket. (Hi, Ted.)
|
|
|
#18091
02/09/2001 6:42 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
looking for a particular book in this house is like looking for..
.. a plum in a pigpen.
|
|
|
#18092
02/12/2001 11:05 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 460
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 460 |
From "Scoop" (1938) by Evelyn Waugh:
"From the moment of her entrance the luncheon party was transformed for Lord Copper; he had gotten a new angle on it."
I think this is the first time I've encountered 'gotten' in a book published in Britain.
|
|
|
#18093
02/12/2001 11:41 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Bill Bryson's Made In America
I'm pretty sure that the book you need is called (here) "Mother Tongue" by Bill Bryson. I re-discovered it recently after a year or so of its absence, when I moved a bookcase and found it down the back. Slippery chap that Bryson, you can never find him when you need him.
In the book he puts forward a quite convincing argument about words like "gotten".
I quote from p164 of the UK Penguin edition:
"It is certainly true that America in general preserved many dozens of words that would otherwise almost certainly have been lost to English. The best noted, perhaps, is gotten which to most Britons is the quaintest of Americanisms. It is now so unused in Britain that many Brtons have to have the distinction between got and gotten explained to them even though they make the same distinction between forgot and forgotten ...."
Imagine that!
|
|
|
#18094
02/12/2001 11:48 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>I think this is the first time I've encountered 'gotten' in a book published in Britain. Either Evelyn Waugh was showing off how well travelled he was or it was a gremlin.
|
|
|
#18095
02/12/2001 12:10 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96 |
Really, looking for a particular book in this house is like looking for ... anybody care to provide a suitable simile from their own experience? Yes I'd love to. "...is like looking for a needle in a haystack." or "....is like looking for fly poop in black pepper!"
jrj
enthusiast
enthusiast
|
|
|
#18096
02/12/2001 12:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96 |
Seems many of us feel that gonna/gotta/wanna are okay spoken but not so okay when written. How does this apply to "gotten?" As in "I haven't gotten sick in a long time, but now I don't feel so good."
"I haven't been sick..." Anyway - whatcha think?
Yes, Hyla, you are so correct. This is really the way I was taught to say it and write it, in grammar school 40 years ago. I was almost believing that "gotten" was OK. But really it is not, just like saying "ain't". No one notices that or even corrects it anymore, such as "I ain't gonna go." Should be "I am not going to go." Basically, we are all in a super hurry to go nowhere, we all want to relax and slow down, but our only sitting is at the computer or in the car. And then we are impatient with slow drivers and slow servers!!!! I would rather have today's cars and computers, than Amish buggies and typewriters. But most under 30 never used a typewriter.
jrj
enthusiast
enthusiast
|
|
|
#18097
02/12/2001 12:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96 |
I'm gonna go = I'm going to go.
Gotta go. = I've got to go.
I wanna go. = I want to go. Thinking about this as I type, I think perhaps in addition to being lazy when talking, if one types with a few fingers, it is easier to type gonna, gotta, wanna than the correct form. But I find typing on the computer so incredibly easy compared to the old elec IBM I learned typing on in '71. And I used to think that was soooo fast compared to the non-electric ones they replaced. Perhaps it should be mandatory to learn typing skills in grade school and high school on manual typewriters and then everyone will really appreciate the cyber age and all that it has to offer. "Whatcha think?"(informal) or "What do you think? (polite and formal)
jrj
enthusiast
enthusiast
|
|
|
#18098
02/12/2001 12:52 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96 |
I'm gonna hafta stratein yew ot here...ya gotta no dat if it's sompin you feel strong nuf about yer gonna wanna make yer voice herd 'n stop that it's too late to change or my vote don't count crap....Yern'Merican aintcha?
My son, age 18, in 1989 (1st grade) learned to write and spell correctly, if not, points were taken off for spelling mistakes. My son, age 11,in 1996 (1st grade) was taught "inventive" spelling. Meaning that to get kids to write and to express their thoughts, and to put down an answer---as long as it looked close--was perfectly aceptable---For example "I fnd a rk."= "I found a rock." No one corrected the kids. Now they are trying to teach phonics and wondering why no one can sound out the words correctly or try to read a big word by sounding it out. Phonics teaches that every syllable has a vowel----inventive spelling teaches only consonant sounds in a word. Any comments?
jrj
enthusiast
enthusiast
|
|
|
#18099
02/12/2001 4:46 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
spelling teaches only consonant sounds in a word.They should be naturals for learning written Hebrew, then! 
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#18100
02/12/2001 5:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 96 |
Phonics teaches that every syllable has a vowel----inventive spelling teaches only consonant sounds in a word. Any comments? So does that mean Hebrew uses many consonants and few vowel sounds? I do know that if I remember to use my phonics when reading German, it is easier and not so overwhelming!! And the English pronunciation rules have more exceptions than do German. But German has more gender grammar rules such as "die das der" etc
I would love to hear comments from others on how they learned to read and spell correctly!!!
jrj
enthusiast
enthusiast
|
|
|
#18101
02/12/2001 7:03 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439 |
bikermon wrote: would love to hear comments from others on how they learned to read and spell correctly!!!
As to reading : my mother read to me then my first grade teacher Sister Rose Ignatius SND was a believer in phonics way back then in the mid-1930s, despite pressures to do otherwise.
As to spelling : It was drummed into my dear little ear during elementary grades by the good Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur via spelling memorization, spelling tests, quizzes, (I will never forget how to spell bicycle after mangling it in a quizz) instruction in how to use a dictionary, and deductions in overall score for anything written if words mis-spelled. It worked.
wow
|
|
|
#18102
02/12/2001 7:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
I would love to hear comments from others on how they learned to read and spell correctly!!!My mother got some phonics books from her sister (a teacher) and taught me to read, starting when I was 3 or 4. I was probably helped by a two-year interlude in Italy where reading = phonics, and then I returned to Canada in grade three. By this time I knew lots of (English) words and could read pretty fast, so I wasn't really resorting to phonics although it was in the name of the workbook used in school. It was still a good method when encountering a new word. I also can relate to the spelling tests, and good spelling in general on all assignments - all this was required of us up to grade six. Then I went into French Immersion, and things got confusing. Besides, I have since concluded that no one really learns anything in junior high school! Somewhere in the years between my brother and me (only four years) this phonics thing was lost. Or else he is genetically a terrible speller; I'm not really sure. And judging by the terrible lab reports I am forced to mark every couple of weeks, the people younger than him didn't get much better instruction. I wish I could take off marks for poor grammar and bad spelling - but I am constrained by a marking scheme handed down from above - besides, then they would have no marks left! ARGHHHHHHHHH! 
|
|
|
#18103
02/12/2001 8:02 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
well- I am one of those chronicly bad spellers-- no amount of phonics seems to help.
but it's ashame about no penalty for it. (i always lost points-- i still made honors classes, but never top honors.) One chemisty teach i know "failed" Lab reports in HS chemistry classes. when student objected, "This is English class, spelling shouldn't count" His response was "the only reason you take English classes is to be able to write clear lab reports!" We teased him a bit--"What Shakespeare is training for better lab reports?"-- but he countered that if we could write as wonderfully as shakespeare, it might not matter that we failed chemistry, but he suspected old Will would do better than most on at a lab report.-- Started with writing in full sentences, etc...
I don't remember learning to read--and I don't remember my mother ever reading to me (or my siblings)-- but she loved to read, and read when ever she could-- so i always thought of reading as something "Grown up" I know that i was reading before i started kindergarden-- simple stuff, like sunday comics, and "golden books".
and I also think gonna, wanna, etc, will creep into language-- at one time Good bye was God be with thee-- and it got contracted to Goodbye-- I am sure some scholar of olden days lamented the "slang"-- and wouldn't brook such slang as acceptable. now we have almost forgotten goodbye once meant something else-- and was spelt differently.
|
|
|
|
|
