I have been reading a few old novels (18th 19th Century) and have noticed something which I frequently have a problem with. I tend to have difficulty working out if certain words should have -ed or -t...ie spelled or spelt...it may have arisen from reading such novels when younger, but it does occur for more words (unspoilt, spoilt, dwelt etc) and I was wondering if you knew if there was a rule for it or if it is just another word/spelling shift?

Somebody is bound to know Bex.

I'm told "dreamt" is the only word in English that has
the MT at the end. And one can say 'dreamed', to add to
your confusion.

never just repeat what you're told, without LIU, he replied without any prompt.

Is there a site for looking up words ending in "mt"?

aside from undreamt and a (now commercial?) variant in promt, you're probably right. but OneLook gives a list of 731 *mt results, a vast majority of which are initialisms I'd guess.

most online dictionaries feature a search function where you can use wildcards: wildcards at onelook

snazzy link t!

I'll need to spend time studying that before understanding
it well. I always saw prompt, never promt. Always with
the P in it.


How do I use it? Go to the home page and put mt in the
search? I did that, and got dozens of responses. The
mt I was referring to was at the end of a word. You said
promt was somewhere: a commercial?

http://www.promt.com/

edit: PROMT is now a registered trademark, picked no doubt because you can't trademark prompt, or any other common word. but it used to be a variant spelling of prompt, in olden days.

I don't respond to arrogance. Put me on "ignore". This
isn't a PM. All can see.

[dragging thread back on topic e] Bexter, I've always just thought the ***t was the British version, vs. the ***ed US version.

what? I'm not seeing any arrogance.

I occasionally use the variant "spelt" and am commonly curtly and derisively corrected when I do so, but never on here.

It refers to a PM I received by someone who put me on
ignore. It referred to the fact that PM's are not private
anyhow,(said the PM), so..... The sender seems to imply that someone had died and he had been made king. I was told my postings are not worth reading. There are those who
are so insecure that they can only get satisfaction by
demeaning others. I am secure in my life, but could not
reply to the PM because of the "ignore" thing. And there
is a logical explanation, but ..... There's the arrogance.

ah, thanks.

Just go to OneLook : when you put *tm in the search box it's all there.
Link

Or for words ending on tic, type in *tic

And so on

To you. [Bob]

I think the possible answer is that 'spelled' is used in the USA and 'spelt' is used in the 'UK'. Although if the novels you refer to were by american writers and they used 'spelt' then clearly my idea is wrong.

Another example of the use of both endings is 'learned' and 'learnt'

I don't know about the States but in England past tense verbs ending in 'ed' are known as regular verbs and verbs with a different past tense word ie 'write' 'wrote' as irregular verbs.
There are a few verbs that take both endings.
To quote an Anon writer "There are no exemptions in English just interesting variations.'

And burned and burnt.

I remember from school English it was like: I burn the buns, I burned the buns, burnt buns.

(who burns the buns will have to sit on the blisters)

ah but burned and burnt have different meanings to me:
burned - the actual burning of something - 'I've burned the cake'
burnt - the item itself - 'the cakes are burnt'
that is just to me though...
hmmm I thought of the American/English divide but a couple of the novels were American and I know both spellings whereas most of my spellings (which are correct all you American people - our dictionary was published first! ) are only the English...we stil have felt and built so I wondered if it was just a shift to the d sound and away from the t sound...hmmm I do believe more brainwork (at least I do!) is needed...

Pray what are 'buns'?

Buns

:¬ )

I wondered if the two spellings may have signaled different inflections: "burned," as past tense verb; "burnt" as adjective, which is how bexter used them.

I think you are on to something merphd
its all in the way you say it. Neither word is really incorrect
but for me there is a slight difference

burned is still happening or recent event
burnt is past occurrence.

same with these pairs;


burned or burnt
dreamed or dreamt
kneeled or knelt
leaned or leant
leaped or leapt
learned or learnt
smelled or smelt
spelled or spelt
spilled or spilt
spoiled or spoilt

Kneeled sounds wrong to me; leaped and leapt are almost interchangeable; I think I have a preference for dreamt, but whether I say dreamed or dreamt I always wonder if I've said something wrong. For the rest of your list, Candy, I would always use the -ed version. I don't object to the -t forms, nor am I uncomfortable when I find them, but to my eye and ear they seem… archaic, I suppose. They just don't live in my immediate environment.

for me..I go with the ending in 'T' for every one, more comfortably.

I'm with Trom....on this one. The "t" versions look
like old British poetry or something. Maybe LEAPT is OK
but the others are too out of usage where I am. But then,
we are all thousands of miles apart.

Maybe LEAPT is OK

What about kept and slept? I think it's just a question of spelling, not a difference between the -ing forms and the simple past.

You're right. I was just referring to the ones in Candy's
list.

Likewise.

Me too.