Forum: Author Hangout

EDIT TO ADD - OH, MY GOD. I took care drafting a response to the first reply by @ustourist, and by the time I posted it there was already another ten or so comments.

I CONCEDE my initial post was full of crap.

I examined my Oxford Dictionary more closely for the verbs lean, burn, dream, and (God forbid) dive.
Its listing for those verbs are very different!

For lean it lists leant as "BrE also", and only uses leaned in its example sentences.
For dive it lists dove as "AmE also", and only uses dived in its example sentences.
However, for burn (dream) it lists two primary forms for both the past tense and past participle. They are burned and burnt (dreamed and dreamt). Its examples then show one form is preferred for some sense, but the other form for other senses.

So, my "rule" [up to about .v04 by now] is to accept my dictionary's primary recommendations as "correct", and to treat all region-specific alternatives as "wrong". When applicable, it does list different primary recommendations for BrE and AmE.

Following that rule would give:
- leaned is always correct (even for BrE)
- dived is always correct (even for AmE)
- burned and burnt are correct in different situations
- dreamed and dreamt are correct in different situations

But even I might break my own rule for lean! My dictionary does not give an examples using leant, but I am with you on this one, I would be inclined to use leant on something as well.

This is the key part of your comment. They may mean the same, but "dived" sounds wrong to many readers who speak AmE. So it does matter to someone speaking AmE.
When this first came up, I asked my wife about, "He dived into the pool." She made a face, shook her head, and said it sounded weird.

Can you ask her about these four sentences?
A. "He dived into the pool."
B. "He dove into the pool."
C. "He has dived into the pool."
D. "He has dove into the pool."

Let's discuss why when you report back her answers were that only B and C are okay.

"dove" can only be used for simple past tense so D is incorrect and C is the correct way to write it.
A & B are the two that I previously asked her about.

Agreed, but not quite complete.
I think that should be "dove" (some prefer "dived") can be used in any tense that employs the 'past tense' form of the verb (including but not limited to the simple past tense).
Only "dived" can be used in all situations that employ the past participle.

True. "Dived" can be the simple past tense. We were talking about what sounded right to the ear of someone who was brought up using "dove" in that situation.

I just learned something new.

There are 12 basic tenses. I thought there were other tenses that used the past tense form.
Not so, the other 11 all use the same form as the present tense, or one of the two participles.

So, what you said the first time was correct, and complete.

Is that a dived wreck? (ie a wreck which divers have visited.)

Is that a dove wreck?

Thanks. I tried, but could not think of an example using the past participle as an adjective.

I think "dived" is correct, and "dove" is wrong in that sentence.
I have found this quote from grammar.com at
http://www.grammar.com/Irregular-Verbs-A-List/

The word dove can serve as the past tense of dive. ... Please note, however, that the past participle of dive is always dived. Thus, you would not say, I have dove into the pond. Instead: I have dived into the pond

who now claims to be a professional author.

If you handed over money that ended up in his pocket, then he IS a professional author.
Often, all that is needed to convince some people, often many, of something is managing to sound like you believe what you are saying.
Ask any living POTUS.

He felt if you could write one well, you couldn't write the other well, because they used different skill sets in the way you used the English language.

I disagree with that.
I have not read your how-to guides.
My guess is the skill set for good technical writing is a subset of the skills needed for writing entertaining stories, plus a capacity for logical structured thinking.

It's with the editors and I hope to have it out soon,

Do let us know when it's available.

Me : I have not read your how-to guides.
You: I recently wrote a Fiction Writing Style Guide

I was being ironic.
You mentioned a professor who says nobody can do both, yet you do both.
I think most born computer programmers who learn how to write interesting stories qould then have the skill set needed for good technical writing.

Jim Thorpe lost his Olympic medals because he got paid for playing baseball one summer during college. They said he was not an amateur because he got paid — a professional.

Now look who's in the Olympics — professional NBA players making a living playing basketball.

With a few exceptions, the US being the biggest, going all the way back to the first modern Olympics, most countries have given their athletes government jobs that they don't actually have to report to so they can train full time for their sports.

The ideal of amateur athletics in the modern Olympics has always been a lie. The the only thing that changed when the US sent NBA players for it's Olympic Basketball team is that the US stopped pretending that the Olympics was about amateur athletics.

Switch - what about dwelled or dwelt? As a BrE speaker I would automatically use the latter.

Agree totally.
The rules weren't any easier before the colonials got hold of the language, but there were less barbaric variations. ;)

Trying to find a single, universal rule is a rabbit hole

I had already replaced my "rule" with I should only trust my references before reading that comment.

For what it's worth, Firefox flags "dwelled" as a typo yet dictionary.com has both "dwelt" and "dwelled."

Until finding this forum I had never properly looked at the sorts of points. Having had to learn BrE when I was nine I have always spelled a word how I speak it unless I know of options.
Dwelled / dwelt refers to verbs with two entirely different meanings:
Dwelled refers to where one lives (ie in a dwelling)
Dwelt refers to lingering thoughts - he dwelt on the concept before making up his mind.

As for Awnlee's quote:

When I proposed to my wife, I went down on bended knee.

I bent over backwards to be nice to your mother.

I think English English speakers would be apoplectic if bent and bended were swapped in the above.

I agree that apoplexy would be appropriate - bended is an adjective and bent can be a verb OR an adjective, the latter when something is out of true, smashed, damaged, deliberately deformed etc..

Personally, I believe it all comes down to what we were taught as kids.

PRECISELY, so my conclusion is I should trust my references when they indicate one is used more commonly than the other.

Despite all you have learnt, you don't come across as a learned man :)

YEP! Still learning. Haven't figured out a way to respond to that one yet :)

Ever wonder what the difference is between "toward" and "towards"? I don't think there really is one, just a preference.

I have rewritten this comment after checking the facts.
"Towards" is definitely more commonly used by both BrE and AmE.
The Oxford dictionary thinks "toward" is so uncommon it doesn't even have a listing for it. It just has a note suggesting only some Americans use it.
AJ's dictionary suggests its becoming archaic and only some British use it.

* Double-shrug

My dictionary lists towards as chiefly North American and toward as becoming archaic. So English English speakers are trapped between obsolesence and barbarism :(

That is truly bizarre!
My guess is there was some sort of transcription error and their research department actually concluded it was 'toward' which was "chiefly North American".

No, 'toward' was definitely the original English English form, persisting today in 'untoward'. It appears that the barbarians across the Pond added the 's' and 'towards' has since been back-ported to the UK where it is in the process of supplanting 'toward'.

The first two pages of a quick SOL google search seems to show 'toward' being more common than 'towards', which I didn't expect.

AJ

I guess it's true for words like "spelled" and "spelt." Whatever sounds better in the sentence.

I agree. I would say 'spelt disaster' and 'spelled out his mistake' every time.

discomfited

Wow! In my book, you win today's prize for being a know-it-all arsehole hands down with that one!
It sure discomfited me!

First I look up comfit and find it means a sugar-covered sweet containing a nut or fruit.
I then look up the verb discomfit and find it is a synonym of discomfort - but on closer inspection - not exactly the same.
Discomfort was defined, "to make someone feel anxious or embarrassed" - but for discomfit that changes to confused or embarrassed.

I bow down to the master. You confused me absolutely, and it was the exactly right word.

the guides I write are not English text books, and would fall way short of what's needed for them because I write them in the wrong style for a text book.

We may need to disagree on this one.
I am not convinced that technical writing cannot be well written.
I suspect your "text book" may be a rare example of good technical writing.

"Learnt" is similar, though I believe that's a time variant (i.e. it's been abandoned for a long, long time).

Since it was what I learnt at school, it wasn't abandoned that long ago.

Sorry, but "dove" is not American-English, it's a regional variant.

Agreed. Some North American regions favour it, others not. But it seems to becoming more common across America and Britain.

"Learnt" is similar, though I believe that's a time variant (i.e. it's been abandoned for a long, long time).

I don't know about abandoned, but the use of all the -t form irregulars is already low and fading away.

I disagree. A quick perusal of today's paper suggests they outnumber the regularised versions in the UK.
Is 'lost' being supplanted by 'losed'?

What I meant was when both -ed and -t spellings exist, the trend is towards -ed endings.
I find myself inclined to use spelled, dreamed, etc. more often than seems natural to me when I know readers will include Americans.

I refuse to write eg 'I buyed that off the internet' just to amuse the barbarians ;)

Good, because we barbarians would be laughing our asses off at you if you did.

Sorry, but "dove" is not American-English, it's a regional variant

What / which city or region would you define as using real proper "American English"? I see references to the Chicago school of grammar and then those who decry those rules so I am totally confused.

This is not a pure USA problem; all those countries I have worked in have local variations; one country has 6 different unconnected languages whilst, when I last looked, Norway publishes official papers in three languages (two being variations).

Edited for clarity. Also "whilst" is said to be wrong; is this Microsoft stupidity or simply ignorance?

The Dictionary of American Regional English says the past tense of dive today is either dived or dove, but originally was dived. "The modern dove is a new formation after drive-drove, weave-wove."

Interesting; I would not have used "dove" but there again I would never ever have used "woved" in respect of creating textiles or even weaving between vehicles etc.

There is not the slightest doubt that that the area of dove is extending itself into the South and West.

I have stated several times in these forums that if dove is not already more commonly used than dived by Americans it certainly will be within the coming decades.

My reluctance to accept dove faded away recently. I had kept on thinking of examples where it would always hit my Yuck-Button.

However, I noticed that it is only used for the simple present tense, and that never sounds awful to me. The instances that had seemed awful were when I attempted using it as the past participle, but when I looked closely, the references all specify that the past participle is dived, and dove is not considered an acceptable alternative, even by Americans.

One last point ... My guess is that even those who usually say dove will occasionally use dived especially for sporting contexts. I really cannot imagine anyone saying scuba-dove, or a footballer dove hoping for the referee to award them a penalty.

present ?????????

Douché.

Okay. I meant 'dove' is only used for the simple past tense.

But, is that really an eight-question-mark offence ???

Edit to add after cleaning my glasses ... a nine-question-mark offence

In the old days it was serious enough to have had you transported to Australia... ;)

In view of its importance to the point you were trying to make

1. It's only important to the barbarians!

2. It is an obvious error, in the sense that anyone who tried to interpret my mistyping literally would not be led astray; they would know my statement contained some sort of error.

3. Didn't you tell me recently people concentrate more on the first and last words of sentences, and the first and last letters of words. I got those right. It deserves at a most a p?????t.

1. It's only important to the barbarians!

It's not important to this barbarian.

Because in the receiving line, he said, the queen asked him: "have you et yet?" If it's the queen's English . . .

I very much doubt that; the word would have been "eaten". He might have had a bit of bother with the accent