To point out that it's PACKED lunch and not PACK lunch?

[ICameOnTheJitney]

I keep seeing threads on here where people say "Pack lunch" I KNOW this belongs in Pedant's Corner but hey...only people who already know will see it then!

I also get irritated by "mash potato"....it's "MASHED potato" ffs.

Why? the ' signifies the silent ed. I haven't used a t as an irregular ending.

Why? In what other context does an apostrophe mark stand for "ed"? Do you write "I walk' to the shops" or "My family travell' to London yesterday"?

Does anyone have an opinion on my comparison of text with impact?

SP you have every right not to care about how people talk but there are settings such as the workplace where it often matters.

Yes - both are wrong, both are ugly if you're an elitist, but as language evolves it apparently doesn't matter that people won't understand what you really mean if you use the wrong tense.

Quite, Sooty.

There's the famous stereotypical example of 'I pay great attention to detale' on a CV. I'm happy that my current job does not involve any hiring (or firing) of staff, but in the past those kind of efforts went straight in the bin. Why would I risk my company's budget on someone too slapdash to even get their CV checked over? If they are too lazy and careless to get that right, what hope do I have that they will do any better at the job?

Here in New Zealand they say "skim milk". I correct them every time by asking for skimmed milk.

And yes, it is texted and packed!

People will understand.

It's obvious what people mean if they say 'I text him yesterday'

Or 'I'm making a pack lunch'

SharpLily - Do you really think that people won't understand what you mean if you say "I text him yesterday" - I think it's perfectly clear, just as "I put it over there" is clear.

Ginnel and snickers are alleyways in Yorkshire. We moved up to Yorkshire from London a few years ago and we still keep finding out new terms. I hate 'chuddy' for chewing gum.

Or alternatively, I could just say I agree with usualsuspect

The suggestion that language changes and adapts is a standard get-out clause for an awful lot of bad grammar. There really is a difference between vibrant new language such as, indeed, using "text" as a verb, and incorrect language. There is no other context in which a verb that ends in two consonants the last of which is a t remains the same whether it is past or present tense: think, for instance, of want, dent, tilt, fast, hint, impact, silt, detect, dust, melt, reject, test, belt - etc etc.

SP

I also miss out ts.

Texing. I know it's texting. It's just how I grew up speaking. People understand me.

And shuntuh, woulduh, oughta etc;

I am grateful that I do not give a fuck about this shit ad it seems to really stress some people out.

Well people understand each other perfectly here and people who say 'text' instead of texted managed to get jobs.

If instead of text they used 'huler' then yes, no one would have a clue what they were on about

Me too,Tee.

As long as I get the gist of what someone is saying I don't care how they say it.

nennypops Does it really matter if "text" is the only other verb that works in this way? I challenge you to find another verb that works in the same way as "be".

It's obvious what people mean if they say 'I text him yesterday'

I'm glad you're so sure. I've spent a large part of my life outside England and my daily life now involves three different languages. In that context, it matters.

Always Shunt, wunt, cunt, dint, dunt. If people dont understand text then what must they think of those

Imagine getting all worked up because someone said 'mash potato' in your presence.

People will understand.
It's obvious what people mean if they say 'I text him yesterday'
Or 'I'm making a pack lunch'

Sure, but why should they have to? In essence you are saying "I expect everyone else to make the effort to understand my incorrect English because I can't be bothered to get it right".

When I come across something like this, particularly in writing, it brings me up short while I work out what the person means. It therefore spoils the flow of what they have written and means that the sense of it doesn't come over as well. Why would you ruin the effect of what you are saying just because you can't be bothered to write or type two letters so that it reads properly? And why be so bad mannered as to make everyone else stop to work out what you mean?

Tee I can't say I don't give a fuck, because to me all this is deeply interesting.

I don't get stressed, however, and I don't pass any value judgements on what people should be saying.

I just like to investigate it and analyse it

SP I think there are settings where people might be well advised not to use those either.

imagine getting all worked up because someone said 'mash potato' in your presence

Then handing them a frog as you couldn't understand them

nennypops Does it really matter if "text" is the only other verb that works in this way? I challenge you to find another verb that works in the same way as "be".

The point is that there are very long-standing historical reasons for the irregularity of the verb "to be", which is irregular in most if not all European languages. There is no reason whatsoever why you should impose irregularity on a new verb. The English language is complicated enough, for goodness sake.

I think it's bad manners to start threads about other people's mistakes on internet forums.

I think it's mad manners to say that other peoples accents are wrong and we must all speak perfect RP.

But mostly I don't care. I'm here for the lolz.