Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar, now : Serbo-Croatian

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 00:03:20 +0200
Sergii Kutnii  wrote:
 
> a shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot

The Weinreichs, pere et fils -- treasures both. 
I have Uriel's Yiddish dictionary, which I love to 
open at random and browse through.   


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar, now : Serbo-Croatian

[Sergii Kutnii]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


a shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_language_is_a_dialect_with_an_army_and_navy


On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Michael Smith  wrote:

> ==
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==
>
>
> On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 02:16:46 +0100
> dan  wrote:
>
> > So : I want to do it
> >
> >   * /1) Serbian : Hoc'u to da uradim : I want it that I do
> > /
> >   * /2) Croatian : Hoc'u to uraditi : I want it to do
> > /
>
>
> The linguist's technical term for this is 'shibboleth',
> in its strict etymological sense (Judges 12:6).
>
>
> --
> --
>
> Michael J. Smith
> m...@smithbowen.net
>
> http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
> http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
> http://cars-suck.org
>
> Favorite political slogan from the 60s:
>
> US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!
>
> 
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
> http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/mnkutster%40gmail.com
>

Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar, now : Serbo-Croatian, correction

[DW]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I was getting confused toothe youngsters in Serbia uploaded in
Croatian and thus in Latin script, not in Serbian or Cyrillic.

David


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar, now : Serbo-Croatian

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 02:16:46 +0100
dan  wrote:

> So : I want to do it
> 
>   * /1) Serbian : Hoc'u to da uradim : I want it that I do
> /
>   * /2) Croatian : Hoc'u to uraditi : I want it to do
> /


The linguist's technical term for this is 'shibboleth', 
in its strict etymological sense (Judges 12:6). 


-- 
--

Michael J. Smith
m...@smithbowen.net

http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
http://cars-suck.org

Favorite political slogan from the 60s: 

US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar, now : Serbo-Croatian

[dan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Shit/shat/shitted

Interestingly, people have been slaughtered for far less.
The most extreme case is that of the Serbo-croatian language, which was 
until the 1990s ONE language with two dialects, Serbian and Croatian. 
According to wikipedia :


>>"Canadian linguist Sean McLennan argues that the differences between 
the variants of Serbo-Croatian are less significant than those between 
the variants of English. 
^ 
Austrian linguist Heinz-Dieter Pohl maintains that the differences 
between the variants of Serbo-Croatian are less significant than those 
between the variants of German^. 
^ 
German linguist Bernhard Gröschel asserts that the differences between 
the variants of Serbo-Croatian are less significant than those between 
the Dutch and the Flemish variants of Dutch. Gröschel argues that even 
linguistic differences between Whites and Blacks in the USA major cities 
exceed those between the standard variants of Serbo-Croatian."<<


Yet in 1993, nationalists thought it was necessary to splice 
Serbo-Cratian into "Serb" and "Croatian". The problem was that this was 
a joke to all inhabitants of the ex-Yugoslav Socialist Federal Republic. 
As though a sudden barrier was set up between Australian English, 
Scottish English, British English and American English.


The task of finding differences between the vernaculars of 
Serbo-Croatian was a really difficult one. Most honest linguists 
reported that there wasn't any, really, and that Serbo-Croatian was 
surprisingly uniform.


However, the following THREE differences were found between "Serb" and 
"Croatian" :


1° In "Serbian" the relative and interrogative pronoun is "shto" 
(what/who) when in the nominative relative form and "shta" when in the 
interrogative form. In Croatian it is always "shto".
So if you said "the guy whoM I spoke to" instead of "the guy who I spoke 
to", you could get killed. The only problem is that the "shto"/"shta" 
distinction runs WITHIN Croatian itself, so that some genuinely Croat 
peasants will say "shta".


2° The infinitive versus the subjunctive. Following the verbs "want" and 
"can", it is usual for a Croat to say :"I want you to do it" and for a 
Serb to say :"I want that you do it".


So : I want to do it

 * /1) Serbian : Hoc'u to da uradim : I want it that I do
   /
 * /2) Croatian : Hoc'u to uraditi : I want it to do
   /

Again, the problem is that many Croatian speakers will actually say 1) 
"Hocu to da urim" but try to explain to the interviewer that they feel 
there is a difference. Like "I will come " and "I shall come". 
WILL/SHALL point to the same problem. Which is American (WILL ?) and 
which is British (SHALL?), and are they not both dialectical and 
widespread ?The infinitive "I want to know" is less sure than the 
subjunctive "I want that I know".


3° the form "I need to" versus "it is necessary for me to". The former 
is (apparently) "Croatain" and the latter (apparently) Serbian :


>>"Peter needs money
 Serbian : Petru treba novacMoney [is necessary to] Peter [-u is 
dative case]

Croatian : Petar treba novacPeter needs money [-ar is nominative]"<<

And THAT IS ALL !!!

There are no other differences between "Serbian" and "Croatian". This is 
much less than the difference between Scottish English and American 
English, or between "Quebec French" And "Standard French".


Actually, the dictionaries of the former Yugoslavia allowed all forms of 
Serb-Croatian and made sure that the vocabulary of the language 
encompassed all forms ("diversity of forms is good"):


trousers : pantalone, hrace
a millenium : millenium, hiljada ("thousand-er")
tomato : paradajz (paradise), rajcica ("love-apple")
library : bilbiotheka, knigecha ("book-store")
music : muzika, glazba ("sound-ing")

It is as though English speaking people suddenly decided to 
differentiate between words of Latin origin (Library) and words of 
Germanic origin (Book-Hall). If you said "it is a ring" and not "it is a 
circle" you could be artificially catalogued as "Anglophile" ??? or 
"un-British" ???
Of course, in the case of ex-Yougoslavia, the real divider is religion 
(Catholic=Croatian, Orthodox=Serb, Muslim=Bosniak). However, the efforts 
put into getting linguists to rip apart a perfectly coherent language, 
Serbo-Croatian (which emerged in the 18th century and developed for 
three centuries inside two dialects : same as with American/British 
English), in order to reinforce nationalist agendas, is both incredibly 
stupid and doomed from the outset. Serbs watch Croatian TV, Croats watch 
Serb TV, and they all understand each o

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Einde O'Callaghan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On 01.01.2013 15:01, Wythe Holt jr. wrote:


Thanks, Alan.  "Arse" is ALSO not in use in the US.  When visiting in England I never heard "ass" (except in the donkey 
sense), so I have always thought "arse" and "ass" meant the same thing.  So you are saying that "shit" and 
"shite" are two words for the same thing?  Wythe

That was the import of my post - two [dialectal ?] variants of the same 
word - confirmed by Oxford Dictionaries Online.


Einde O'Callaghan



Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Wythe Holt jr.]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Thanks, Alan.  "Arse" is ALSO not in use in the US.  When visiting in England I 
never heard "ass" (except in the donkey sense), so I have always thought "arse" 
and "ass" meant the same thing.  So you are saying that "shit" and "shite" are 
two words for the same thing?  Wythe

-Original Message-
From: marxism-bounces+wholt=law.ua@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu on behalf 
of Alan Bradley
Sent: Mon 12/31/2012 6:43 AM
To: Wythe Holt jr.
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar
 
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==




Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/wholt%40law.ua.edu


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Steve Heeren]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I thought the UK "shite" came from the German "Scheisse", pronounced 
"shy-sa".  it was the americans who changed shite to shit, like they do 
with everything they touch.




Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:24:13 -0500
"Thomas Bias"  wrote:

> The Greek word is σχατά (pronounced, skha-TAH). That's where I thought the
> term "scat" came from. ~Tom

Well, they come from the same Indo-European root. Like πορδή and 'fart'.
So there's a connection no matter what; only question is how direct 
it is. 
 
But it would be surprising to find a learned Greek loan-word in the 
lexicon of venery. I'm sticking with the native English explanation; 
I say that's the null hypothesis. 


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Thomas Bias]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


The Greek word is σχατά (pronounced, skha-TAH). That's where I thought the
term "scat" came from. ~Tom

-Original Message-
From: marxism-bounces+tgbias=ptd@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
[mailto:marxism-bounces+tgbias=ptd@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu] On
Behalf Of Michael Smith
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 12:27 PM
To: tgb...@ptd.net
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 08:42:26 +0100
Einde O'Callaghan  wrote:
 
> > I shit today.
> > I shit yesterday.
> >
> In Ireland the most common form of the infinitive is "to shite" 
> although probably more common is "to have a shite" - the past tense 
> being "had a shite".

'Shite' is more etymological than short-i 'shit': the verb has a long vowel
in the present tense in Anglo-Saxon, which 'shite' faithfully reflects. 

Now that you mention it, I have heard the preterite 'shit' as well as
'shat', though less commonly. Maybe it got remodelled on the analogy of weak
verbs with final 't', like 'knit'. Alternatively, the past participle in A-S
has a short vowel (regular in this class of strong verbs) and that might
have affected the preterite too. 

In A-S the verb is spelled 'scitan' (which a length mark over the i which
doesn't come reliably through email), prounced 'sheetan'. 
The preterite is 'scat', pronounced 'scat' -- the 'c' stays hard before a
back vowel, and no smutty puns here, please. This word survives in Mod-E in
just that form -- we use it for a wild animal's droppings out in the woods.


-- 
--

Michael J. Smith
m...@smithbowen.net

http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
http://cars-suck.org

Favorite political slogan from the 60s: 

US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/tgbias%40ptd.ne
t




Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Peggy Dobbins]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Southern diphthong, dear Wythe

On Dec 31, 2012, at 7:25 AM, "Wythe Holt jr." <
> 
> 
> What is the difference, in pronunciation or meaning, between "shit" and 
> "shite" (the latter of which is apparently not in use in the US)?
> 
> 


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 08:42:26 +0100
Einde O'Callaghan  wrote:
 
> > I shit today.
> > I shit yesterday.
> >
> In Ireland the most common form of the infinitive is "to shite" although 
> probably more common is "to have a shite" - the past tense being "had a 
> shite".

'Shite' is more etymological than short-i 'shit': the verb has a long vowel
in the present tense in Anglo-Saxon, which 'shite' faithfully reflects. 

Now that you mention it, I have heard the preterite 'shit' as well 
as 'shat', though less commonly. Maybe it got remodelled on the analogy 
of weak verbs with final 't', like 'knit'. Alternatively, the past participle
in A-S has a short vowel (regular in this class of strong verbs) and 
that might have affected the preterite too. 

In A-S the verb is spelled 'scitan' (which a length mark over the 
i which doesn't come reliably through email), prounced 'sheetan'. 
The preterite is 'scat', pronounced 'scat' -- the 'c' stays hard before 
a back vowel, and no smutty puns here, please. This word survives 
in Mod-E in just that form -- we use it for a wild animal's droppings 
out in the woods.  

-- 
--

Michael J. Smith
m...@smithbowen.net

http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
http://cars-suck.org

Favorite political slogan from the 60s: 

US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Alan Bradley]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


From: "Wythe Holt jr."
> What is the difference, in pronunciation or meaning, between "shit" and 
> "shite" (the latter of which is
> apparently not in use in the US)?

Pronunciation: "wit" versus "white".
Meaning" "ass" versus "arse".

Sometimes, "ass" can be used as a softer alternative to "arse".A bit like how 
"wanker" isn't particularly meaningful in the US - see The Simpsons for how a 
quite impolite term can be repeatedly used on US TV without censors getting all 
weird about it.

Technically, "ass" can also mean "donkey".


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Wythe Holt jr.]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


What is the difference, in pronunciation or meaning, between "shit" and "shite" 
(the latter of which is apparently not in use in the US)?



Original Message-
From: marxism-bounces+wholt=law.ua@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu on behalf 
of Einde O'Callaghan
Sent: Mon 12/31/2012 1:42 AM
To: Wythe Holt jr.
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar
 
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On 31.12.2012 02:43, Ian Angus wrote:
> ==
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==
>
>
> Michael Smith  smithbowen.net> writes:
>
>> I never heard any other preterite for 'shit' than 'shat', which is
>> good Anglo-Saxon. Are there really people who say 'shitted'?  Why,
>> for Grimm's sake?
>
> Living in North America, I've never heard "shat" except as a joke.
> And I've never heard "shitted" at all.
>
> In my experience (not, I realize, always the best guide)
> the commonly used preterite of "shit" is "shit."
> Similar to "hit."
>
> I shit today.
> I shit yesterday.
>
In Ireland the most common form of the infinitive is "to shite" although 
probably more common is "to have a shite" - the past tense being "had a 
shite".

While in London I seem to recall that the most common verb was "to have 
a shit". My only encounter with "shat" in either country was in the 
passive structure  "he got shat upon from a great height!", meaning that 
he got a really raw deal or was treated very badly - the use of the more 
archaic "upon" would indicate that it's a idiomatic expression, perhaps 
having humorous origins.

Incidentally I've always found "Shit!" a much more expressive expletive 
than "Shite!" ;-)

Einde O'callaghan



Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/wholt%40law.ua.edu


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Einde O'Callaghan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On 31.12.2012 02:43, Ian Angus wrote:

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Michael Smith  smithbowen.net> writes:


I never heard any other preterite for 'shit' than 'shat', which is
good Anglo-Saxon. Are there really people who say 'shitted'?  Why,
for Grimm's sake?


Living in North America, I've never heard "shat" except as a joke.
And I've never heard "shitted" at all.

In my experience (not, I realize, always the best guide)
the commonly used preterite of "shit" is "shit."
Similar to "hit."

I shit today.
I shit yesterday.

In Ireland the most common form of the infinitive is "to shite" although 
probably more common is "to have a shite" - the past tense being "had a 
shite".


While in London I seem to recall that the most common verb was "to have 
a shit". My only encounter with "shat" in either country was in the 
passive structure  "he got shat upon from a great height!", meaning that 
he got a really raw deal or was treated very badly - the use of the more 
archaic "upon" would indicate that it's a idiomatic expression, perhaps 
having humorous origins.


Incidentally I've always found "Shit!" a much more expressive expletive 
than "Shite!" ;-)


Einde O'callaghan



Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Ian Angus]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Michael Smith  smithbowen.net> writes:

> I never heard any other preterite for 'shit' than 'shat', which is 
> good Anglo-Saxon. Are there really people who say 'shitted'?  Why, 
> for Grimm's sake? 

Living in North America, I've never heard "shat" except as a joke. 
And I've never heard "shitted" at all.

In my experience (not, I realize, always the best guide) 
the commonly used preterite of "shit" is "shit." 
Similar to "hit." 

I shit today.
I shit yesterday.

Using anything else will earn you odd looks.

Ian Angus



Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Ken Hiebert]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Ken Hiebert said:
Granted that English is full of inconsistencies and odd usages and granted that 
"correct" usage changes over time, we might as well use the "correct" usage 
unless it makes us sound snooty or pretentious. I  don't think "hanged" would 
strike most people as odd or pretentious, so we might as well use it as the 
past tense of hang when referring to capital punishment.
Perhaps only a few people would notice an "incorrect" usage, but why should we 
get into a debate with them over usage when we wish to engage them in other 
discussions.


Michael Smith replied:
Not sure at whom this is directed, but I for one repudiate 
completely the whole idea of correct and incorrect usage. 
That's the point of the subject heading. 

And of course the 'inconsistencies' and 'odd usages' (odd by 
what standards?) of English are at least half the charm of 
English philology. 


Ken Hiebert replies:
English, along with every other living language, is evolving.  So I don't want 
to insist on any timeless standard of English.
But i do try to be "correct."  While I would lustily join in singing Phil Ochs' 
I Ain't  Marchin' Any More, i would be unlikely to use the word ain't in a 
public speech.  i would be afraid that such a usage might make it difficult for 
some people to take me seriously.  Even if it can be shown that 150 years ago 
ain't was entirely "correct."
At the same time I would think twice before a I corrected someone else who used 
that expression.  I would want to be sure that such a correction would be 
welcome.

As for the word hanged as the past tense of hang referring to capital 
punishment, I could be out of date.  But if this usage is still quite common, 
why shouldn't we stick with it?

Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 21:14:56 -0800
Ken Hiebert  wrote:

> Granted that English is full of inconsistencies and odd usages and
> granted that "correct" usage changes over time, we might as well use
> the "correct" usage unless it makes us sound snooty or pretentious.
> I don't think "hanged" would strike most people as odd or
> pretentious, so we might as well use it as the past tense of hang
> when referring to capital punishment.

Not sure at whom this is directed, but I for one repudiate 
completely the whole idea of correct and incorrect usage. 
That's the point of the subject heading. 

And of course the 'inconsistencies' and 'odd usages' (odd by 
what standards?) of English are at least half the charm of 
English philology. 

-- 
--

Michael J. Smith
m...@smithbowen.net

http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
http://cars-suck.org

Favorite political slogan from the 60s: 

US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Ken Hiebert]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Granted that English is full of inconsistencies and odd usages and granted that 
"correct" usage changes over time, we might as well use the "correct" usage 
unless it makes us sound snooty or pretentious.  I don't think "hanged" would 
strike most people as odd or pretentious, so we might as well use it as the 
past tense of hang when referring to capital punishment.
Perhaps only a few people would notice an "incorrect" usage, but why should we 
get into a debate with them over usage when we wish to engage them in other 
discussions.

ken h

Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[Michael Smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 04:08:08 +0100
dan  wrote:
  
> And I'm also wrong about DIVE which is a regular verb (preterit DIVED) 
> which developed, in some British and American dialects, the preterit 
> DOVE by analogy with DRIVE/DROVE.

Yeah, that's one of the really funny things about English. You would 
expect the strong verbs to get remodelled on the weak, since the latter 
is the 'productive' part of the morphological system. But there are plenty 
of cases where formerly weak verbs have been remodelled as if they 
were strong. 

Sometimes I suspect the reason is partly phonetic -- 'dived' has a 
nasty voiced labioalveolar consonant cluster, for example. 

But this doesn't apply to hon/hangian, which were two different 
words (albeit with a remote shared root) for as long ago as we have 
anything that's recognizably English. Different semantics too -- 
one transitive, the other not. 

I never heard any other preterite for 'shit' than 'shat', which is 
good Anglo-Saxon. Are there really people who say 'shitted'?  Why, 
for Grimm's sake? 


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[dan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


And I'm also wrong about DIVE which is a regular verb (preterit DIVED) 
which developed, in some British and American dialects, the preterit 
DOVE by analogy with DRIVE/DROVE. "Dove" exists in some British dialects 
and has become the standard past tense in much of Canada. In the United 
States DIVED and DOVE are both widespread as preterit. "Dove" is 
regarded as "rural but accepted" in Northern England, Scotland and Ireland .
Surprisingly, if you google "I dove into" you will get 2 690 000 
results, and if you google "I dived into" you will get 1 010 000 
results. This seems weird, given that a majority of dictionaries (both 
US and GB), while allowing DOVE as "correct written English", still 
prefer DIVED as the better alternative.


I'm not even going into the DREAM/DREAMT/DREAMED or SHINE/SHONE/SHINED 
business.


Yep. I really must learn more about the history of the English language 
before telling other people what is "correct" and what is not.




Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[dan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


And once more, I am WRONG. Having looked up HANG in an etymological 
dictionary of the English language, I once more realize that I should 
check my facts before shooting off my mouth.


>>"

hang (v.) 
 Look 
up hang at Dictionary.com 

   a fusion of O.E. hon "suspend" (transitive, class VII strong verb;
   past tense heng, pp. hangen), and O.E. hangian (weak, intransitive,
   past tense hangode) "be suspended;" also probably influenced by O.N.
   hengja "suspend," and hanga "be suspended." All from P.Gmc. *khang-
   (cf. O.Fris. hangia, Du. hangen, Ger. hängen), from PIE *kank- "to
   hang" (cf. Goth. hahan, Hittite gang- "to hang," Skt. sankate
   "wavers," L. cunctari "to delay;" see also second element in
   Stonehenge
   ).
   As a method of execution, in late Old English (but originally
   specifically of crucifixion).

   Hung emerged as pp. 16c. in northern England dialect, and hanged
   endured only in legal language (which tends to be conservative) and
   metaphors extended from it (I'll be hanged). Teen slang sense of
   "spend time" first recorded 1951; hang around "idle, loiter" is from
   1830, and hang out (v.) is from 1811. Hang fire (1781) was
   originally used of guns that were slow in communicating the fire
   through the vent to the charge. To let it all hang out "be relaxed
   and uninhibited" is from 1967."<<



On 12/29/2012 03:00 AM, dan wrote:

Well, this is not completely true.

The verb HANG is a good ol' Germanic verb whose preterit was always 
HUNG (English vb: HANG preterit : HUNG, German : HING HANG, Dutch : 
HING HANG)
As is the case with many other English irregular verbs, the preterit 
of HANG (i.e. HUNG) is sometimes "regularized" (meaning the ending -ED 
is added as if it was a normal verb). As with DIVE DOVE (many people 
say "I DIVED into the lake" and not DOVE), or DREAM DREAMT ("I DREAMED 
of my mother" instead of "I DREAMT of my mother"), or even SHIT SHAT 
("I SHITTED my pants" and not "I SHAT my pants"). The usage of 
irregular preterits is an American English/British English thing, but 
also, a dialect (NOT dialectical) thing. Some English dialects follow 
the old Germanic preterit, some don't. Same with American dialects.


In the case of HANG/HUNG/(regularized :HANGED) the official usage was 
established in the 18th century : HANG , HUNG for objects and coats, 
HANGED for people on the gallows. The reason is obscure, but my theory 
is that legal terminology always follows the Latin/French and must 
thus regularize HANG as the parallel of French PENDRE/PENDU which 
displays the regular -DRE/-DU correspondence.


Back to the previous post. There is no evidence that there were TWO 
verbs meaning HANG in Old English (i.e. PRoto-Germanic) and that the 
two verbs gave different preterits.


There was and always has been ONE verb : HANG.


>>"Slooowly I turned. This is what philologists refer to as schoolmarm
grammar.

Now in fact from the earliest times there have been two 'hang' words
in English, represented by Old English (= "Anglo-Saxon") 'hangian' and
'hôn' -- the former being a weak verb, past tense 'hangode', and the 
latter

a strong verb, past tense 'heng', participle 'hangen'. 'hôn' gives us our
modern hang, hung, through routine phonetic changes which are thoroughly
understood. 'hangian' survives only in the shibboleth usage 'hanged'
when referring to the method of execution. But both words have always
been used for both. In the Anglo-Saxon translation of Genesis we find
'hine man hçng' (they hung him) in reference to Joseph's unfortunate
cellmate the baker. In fact you could make a pretty good case that 'hung'
is actually preferable to 'hanged' and the latter hypercorrect, since
'hangian' mostly seems to be used in an intransitive sense."<<



Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar

[dan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Well, this is not completely true.

The verb HANG is a good ol' Germanic verb whose preterit was always HUNG 
(English vb: HANG preterit : HUNG, German : HING HANG, Dutch : HING HANG)
As is the case with many other English irregular verbs, the preterit of 
HANG (i.e. HUNG) is sometimes "regularized" (meaning the ending -ED is 
added as if it was a normal verb). As with DIVE DOVE (many people say "I 
DIVED into the lake" and not DOVE), or DREAM DREAMT ("I DREAMED of my 
mother" instead of "I DREAMT of my mother"), or even SHIT SHAT ("I 
SHITTED my pants" and not "I SHAT my pants"). The usage of irregular 
preterits is an American English/British English thing, but also, a 
dialect (NOT dialectical) thing. Some English dialects follow the old 
Germanic preterit, some don't. Same with American dialects.


In the case of HANG/HUNG/(regularized :HANGED) the official usage was 
established in the 18th century : HANG , HUNG for objects and coats, 
HANGED for people on the gallows. The reason is obscure, but my theory 
is that legal terminology always follows the Latin/French and must thus 
regularize HANG as the parallel of French PENDRE/PENDU which displays 
the regular -DRE/-DU correspondence.


Back to the previous post. There is no evidence that there were TWO 
verbs meaning HANG in Old English (i.e. PRoto-Germanic) and that the two 
verbs gave different preterits.


There was and always has been ONE verb : HANG.


>>"Slooowly I turned. This is what philologists refer to as schoolmarm
grammar.

Now in fact from the earliest times there have been two 'hang' words
in English, represented by Old English (= "Anglo-Saxon") 'hangian' and
'hôn' -- the former being a weak verb, past tense 'hangode', and the latter
a strong verb, past tense 'heng', participle 'hangen'. 'hôn' gives us our
modern hang, hung, through routine phonetic changes which are thoroughly
understood. 'hangian' survives only in the shibboleth usage 'hanged'
when referring to the method of execution. But both words have always
been used for both. In the Anglo-Saxon translation of Genesis we find
'hine man hçng' (they hung him) in reference to Joseph's unfortunate
cellmate the baker. In fact you could make a pretty good case that 'hung'
is actually preferable to 'hanged' and the latter hypercorrect, since
'hangian' mostly seems to be used in an intransitive sense."<<


Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Schoolmarm grammar (was: Largest execution)

[mjs]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


> With respect, may I note that the past tense of "hang," with reference to
> executing a person, is "hanged." The past tense for a picture is "hung."


Slooowly I turned. This is what philologists refer to as schoolmarm
grammar.

Now in fact from the earliest times there have been two 'hang' words
in English, represented by Old English (= "Anglo-Saxon") 'hangian' and
'hôn' -- the former being a weak verb, past tense 'hangode', and the latter
a strong verb, past tense 'heng', participle 'hangen'. 'hôn' gives us our
modern hang, hung, through routine phonetic changes which are thoroughly
understood. 'hangian' survives only in the shibboleth usage 'hanged'
when referring to the method of execution. But both words have always
been used for both. In the Anglo-Saxon translation of Genesis we find
'hine man hçng' (they hung him) in reference to Joseph's unfortunate
cellmate the baker. In fact you could make a pretty good case that 'hung'
is actually preferable to 'hanged' and the latter hypercorrect, since
'hangian' mostly seems to be used in an intransitive sense.




Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com