BS: English grammar question

Subject: BS: English grammar question
From: maire-aine
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 06:45 PM

Can anybody explain how it comes to be that verbs with a "double-e" have a past tense with a "t"? For example: keep/kept, sleep/slept, sweep/swept, weep/wept.

Clearly, this is not an earth-shattering problem, but I've wondered about it for a while.

Thanks,
Maryanne

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 06:52 PM

Well, the only thing I can say with any level of certainty is that George Bush had nothin' to do with it...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Terry McDonald
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:02 PM

Speed, bleed, seed, need, weed............?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:03 PM

Anglo-Saxon had a lot of inflections for grammatical changes, and we inherited many of them in modern English. Many are phasing out, but a lot are still here.

It would never occur to a native English speaker, in my experience, to say "sleeped", "weeped", "keeped", "sweeped".   Why?   No reason, really, except that's the way the language has gone.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: maire-aine
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:05 PM

Following upon Terry's post, my examples all end in "p", while his end in "d". How does that factor in?

Maryanne

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:05 PM

It seems to only work that way with words ending in "eep". Maybe it's because it's more comfortable to say "slept" than it is to say "sleeped". I mean, it rolls off the tongue more easily.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:06 PM

Maryanne - it may have to do with the etymology of such words. It may have to do with the ease of speaking, or the euphony of the word, or none of the above. Many things come into play in the English grammar.

I did find this site:
http://www.computing.surrey.ac.uk/personal/st/A.Gruning/teaching/cs187/SS2008/slides_20070219.pdf

It covers irregular verbs, etc. Whether it will answet your question? But it may start you in the right direction.

Good Luck...and let us know the answer too.

JotSC

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:29 PM

You asked only about words ending in "eep". Confer, however, with other words with the exact same sound, which are regular in construction:

reap, reaped, reaped, leaping
leap, leaped, leaped, leaping ("Leap" used to have the past and past perfect form of "lept". You still occasionally find "lept", but it's going away in favor of the regular "leaped".

What's the difference? Damfino.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Monique
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:39 PM

Some explanations here
Be happy to have such an easy conjugation!

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:47 PM

In the UK the past and past perfect forms of "Leap" are, I think, "Leapt".

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:00 PM

Yes, I still use "leapt" sometimes. It's pronounced "lept".

A living sheep is a sheep. A dead sheep? Oh, well, that's a "shept", of course. ;-) If you find a shept lying in the field, make sure to dress it quickly and refrigerate the mutton before it goes bad.

A songbird peeps, but if its peeping occurred yesterday, then you say that it "pept".

And so on...

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:07 PM

How about beep - beeped, peep - peeped and seep - seeped.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:16 PM

or bleep - bleeped and steep - steeped

DC

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:19 PM

or even cheep - cheeped

DC

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Monique
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:41 PM

Wouldn't that depend on whether the verbs are "old" or "new"?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 08:57 PM

When proof-reading for an international publication, the U. S.-UK differences came up, e. g. spelled, spelt and their ilk. Different preferences in UK and U. S. so we accepted both. Leap, leaped, leapt is another. Many in the UK use leapt. We used to get letters, however, from Americans on the one hand questioning 'Briticisms,' and from the English pointing with scorn at 'Americanisms.'

Big arguments about collectives like army- in the U. S. it is 'army is,' in UK it is 'army are.' Listen to the BBCnews on cable; Chelsea are, etc. Americans say Boston is, etc.

In Canada, which has a foot in both linguistic camps, both usages may be heard, but preference is tending more and more towards American usage. Proximity and cable television bring uniformity.

Many conventions, as mentioned above, have come down through the years from Old English; just go with the flow.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 09:18 PM

What about dream? Any other that uses 'eamt'?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: catspaw49
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 10:39 PM

Somewhere there is a really boring jadrool who knows everything about English grammar and outside of his novelty value he is the singular most pathetic human being on earth..........with the possible exception of the limpdick who put the bop in the bop-shee-bop-shee-bop.

I love ya' but try to find something else to bother you Maryanne(;<))

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 10:39 PM

And then there's wreak; I wince when I hear "wreaked" instead of "wrought" but that's my Oz version of pedantry for you.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 11:23 PM

The pronunciation of the vowel sounds in many English words underwent changes between 1200 and 1600 in what's known as the Great Vowel Shift. Many words that had been pronounced with what we call a "short e" (as in "bed") came to be pronounced with a "long e" (as in "bead"). Prior to then, in Old English and Middle English times, the verbs sleep, keep, weep, and sweep were pronounced more like slep, kep, wep, and swep. The past tenses were not really all that irregular. They were formed by adding the unvoiced "t" sound instead of the voiced "d" sound simply because it's easier to say "t" after "ep" than to say "d".

As to why the present tenses of these verbs underwent the vowel shift while their past tenses kept the older pronunciations is something I'm not boring jadrool enough to know.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 11:45 PM

Little kids logically will say keeped, sleeped, etc. My grandson is growing out of it now, but has been known to do so. Bill Bryson makes note of it in his excellent book, The Mother Tongue. (I think it's a little out of date, though, on some things. It was written in 1991 and fairly predicts the demise of Irish Celtic, etc. Wish he would do an updated version.) Still worth the read and done with much laughter pointing out absurdities, origins, etc. in a very entertaining way.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 12:01 AM

Even now it's a good read, Kat, and a good antidote to any tendency to be over-righteous about "correct" practice.

But, even so, "wreaked" makes me wince; I must be truly old-fashioned.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 12:09 AM

What makes me wince is,

"So I'm like, 'Whaddya mean?', and she's, like, 'You should know what I, like, mean!', and I'm like 'Whatever!', and he's like, "Will you two just stop?!", and I'm like, she is just soooooo...."

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Gurney
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 01:09 AM

It's complicated because we LIKE it complicated!

If anyone wants simple, let 'em Esperanto.





There. Now I feel better! 8<}

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Monique
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:10 AM

It's complicated because it's old and changes over time. Like shoes: the more people wear them, the less they look like the way they used to be when they were new and the less they look alike.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:28 AM

to myself (TAB...not ENTER, you dummy)! Sorry about that vacant post up there. I was about to offer "plead/pled" which seems to be morphing to pleaded. To me that seems to be the wrong direction!?

As I have been told by those in the know, in Middle English words such as "knight" each letter was pronounced. "Knight" was "k'nict" whereas just plain old night was "nicht" not far off the German pronunciation. A "knife" was "k'niffee" and a "wife" was a "Wiffee". And Old English is pretty much unrecognizable to the uninitiated.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Terry McDonald
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 04:21 AM

Changing languages, I've always been intrigued by the way that English words ending in 'ity' are matched in Spanish by 'idad' (Trinity - Trinidad, electricity-electricidad etc). I don't speak Spanish so I'm sure there are exceptions, but I've never come across one yet.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 05:10 AM

I was about to offer "plead/pled" which seems to be morphing to pleaded. To me that seems to be the wrong direction!?

I have never, to my knowledge, heard "pled" used as the past of "plead", nor would I ever use it. "Pleaded" is correct for me.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: bubblyrat
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:03 AM

Manchester Citidad ?? Simplicidad? Wittidad? The Nittidad Grittidad Dirt Band ??

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Terry McDonald
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:19 AM

Machester Ciudad, Simplicidad seems to be correct, don't get the third one and the last example just has to be right!

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Monique
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:56 AM

Latin words ending in "-tas" => Italian words ending in "-tà", Romanian words ending in "-ate", Spanish words ending in "-dad", Occitan words ending in "-tat", French words ending in "-té", English words ending in "-ty" through Old French.
This works for nouns ending in -ty that are not diminutives, nor for adjectives either.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Jim McLean
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:58 AM

In dialect Scottish you'll hear 'keepit' (kept) and 'keekit' (keeked, one syllable).

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 07:27 AM

the English language is full of contradictions .
look at the different pronunciations of the these words .cough,bough,rough,dough,enough, phonetically the would be spelled.cof bow,ruff,do,enuff ,then the word do,is pronounced du .

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: maire-aine
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 08:31 AM

Here in midwest USA, I find the phrase "pled guilty" more normal sounding than "pleaded guilty", although we hear both forms.

Maryanne

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 11:07 AM

Rowan said:

And then there's wreak; I wince when I hear "wreaked" instead of "wrought" but that's my Oz version of pedantry for you.

I, too, used to think that "wrought" was the past tense of "to wreak", but the two words are unrelated.   I looked them up (that's when the trouble starts):


To wreak (third-person singular simple present wreaks, present participle wreaking, simple past wreaked or rarely wroke, past participle wreaked or rarely wroken)

   1. (transitive) To cause, inflict or let out, especially if causing harm or injury.

          The earthquake wreaked havoc in the city.
          She wreaked her anger on his car.

   2. (archaic) To inflict or take vengeance on.
          * 1856-1885 — Alfred Tennyson, Gareth and Lynette

                Kill the foul thief, and wreak me for my son.


But "wrought" is defined as:

wrought

   1. Simple past tense and past participle of work.

Note that the cognate "-wright" (as it appears in words like shipwright, millwright, wheelwright) is one who works in a particular field, named by the first element in the word. Thus, I suppose you'd gloss them as "shipworker" etc. Actually it seems to be more of a "-builder" or "-maker".

I have to confess that I find myself uncomfortable with "wreaked" as the past tense of "to wreak", mainly out of old habit I suppose. But the definitions and etymology rule, so I shudder and bear it.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 12:55 PM

Right, Uncle Dave. Wreaked it is. The OED sez yer rite. The man from woop woop is wrong.

Wrought means made, fashioned, shaped, prepared, etc., e. g., finely wrought steel swords; or it also is used to mean overly excited over something, as in 'all wrought up'. (I like the slang 'all het up' better).

Slag, many scholars would like to know the Middle English pronunciations. Vas you dere, Charlie?
The use of the k' in pronunciation is extrapolation from modern Germanic and northern dialects, but much is guesswork.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: meself
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 01:12 PM

That's the trouble with becoming too terribly indignant about grammar and usage - chances are that you're wrong (even if you're repeating precisely what you were told back when you were in short pants, when the world was such a better place).

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: peregrina
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 01:33 PM

Old English strong verbs. They're very logical in Old English, but in Modern English new verbs are generated according to the Old English weak verb system, that is the same verbal stem plus suffix -ed. So today some strong verbs get sucked into incorrect weak endings by the principle of analogy. Modern English is also collapsing separate classes of the strong verbs. 'Gotten' as the past participle of 'get' is correct according to etymology, but is being replaced in some areas by 'got' (analogous to pasts such as 'bought'). This collapse of strong verbs and victory of the weak verbs for new word formation is the source of other confusions (dive--dived or dove) etc.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: gnu
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 01:40 PM

Kept takes up less storage than keeped. It's more green. >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 02:19 PM

" I wince when I hear "wreaked" instead of "wrought" "

That's indeed sad, but far worse is the increasingly common usage of "wrecked havoc"....arrrggggg...(don't believe me? Google it.)




people see it spelled correctly, and 'see what they are familar with',...."wreck"... then pronounce it incorrectly and, if needing to write it, they write it like they have been saying it; and another word heads for oblivion.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 02:24 PM

"...fairly predicts the demise of Irish Celtic"

Has there ever been a language known as "Irish Celtic"?
................................

keep and kept etc are particular examples of a vowel change from long e to short as an indication of tense.

Also shows up in, for example bleed/ bled, or dream/ dreamt. And there are other analogous vowel changes for the same purpose eg run/ran.

But the alternative, and more "regular" way of doing it coexists and overlaps, with the vowel staying long and "ed" being added at the end. And children, being pretty sharp, notice that regular form and apply it, which is why they say things like "I runned" or "I keeped". And that's how those forms creep into the language, and often take over from the older form.

It's a very curious language. But then they all are.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:03 PM

Mcgrath reminded me of the "I seen," which is common in North America. Teachers have tried to beat it out of their pupils for generations, but with little success.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:15 PM

But tell me why L is pronounced as a W by many of the tracksuit bottomed hoardes who wear "all weather" trainers all the time?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:48 PM

Because language changes all the time, and you can't stop it happening.

For example the spelling "hoardes" for "hordes" is highly unusual, but I can imagine it could conceivably become standard English at some time.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:53 PM

Hmmm- perhaps we will read that in these hard times, the hoardes are hording their dollars (pounds, pesos yen yuan etc.).

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 04:25 PM

The man from woop woop is wrong.

Sorry to disabuse you Q but, out here, it's known as Woop Woop West.
And many thanks to Uncle Dave; such erudition. Now, why didn't I go to the dictionary instead of relying on the oral history I picked up in my youth?

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:47 PM

Slightly off-topic, but I always think of Jez Lowe's song about the Bergen as the "eep" song, because the first accented word of the first and third lines of each verse is an eep or eap word....

Kitty

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 06:59 AM

Thank you to the learned Uncle Dave!

Cheers
Nigel (stirring the pot just a little!)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 08:23 AM

Rowan, I was looking in the OED and accidentally spotted woop woop. They say it is sham aborigine and a jocular name for a remote rural area or an imaginary place.
No woop woop east?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: MarkS
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 09:26 AM

For a very well written and entertaining book on our language, try the offering by Bill Bryson = English, The Mother Toung And How It Got That Way.
I may have the title off a bit, but I promise, you will never look at the words you speak or why you speak them the way you do the same way again!
Mark