i am loathing the gradual creep of the term 'gotten' on here

[FrankietheSquealer]

Please desist

Grammar is not taught at all in English schools.
I don't mind quaintly archaic "gotten". What I loathe is "underwear" for pants and "bathroom" for toilet. Both used increasingly.

math Your Danish friend may be a bit thick. Does he not understand the use of 'have'? It crops up a lot in English conjugation.

I think its more likely that its you who is a bit thick, if you think you can judge a non-native English speaker's intelligence from a three word sentence.

There seems to be confusion between German and English here.
the plural 'wir xxx-en' ending in German has nothing to do with the 'gotten' form of the verb 'to get' in American English.

I've no idea if people are confused between English and German. In Dutch, which like English, is full of irregular verbs, its:

I have: ik heb
I had: ik had
I have had: ik heb gehad
I got: ik had

If you change the personal pronoun, you also change the word ending, which is where I struggle with "gotten":

I have: ik heb
We got: wij hebben
You got: jij hebt
You (people) (formal): juillie hebt

English grammar is admittedly simpler than Dutch (you do not have reflexive verbs for one thing), but past perfect and conditional tenses take exactly the same form in both languages. They stem from the same language family and if you cannot hear the echo of one in the other, then you have no feel for language.

If you really cannot conceptualise that American English grammar has simplified and become less formal, and are simply unable to get beyond repeating (wrongly) that it used to be a uniform usage in English, then maybe you could at least quell your tendency to be rude. Or perhaps you could at least explain, again without being rude or patronising (if you can), why American English over-uses "gotten" for so many different tenses.

I've had discussions on mumsnet before about English grammar, and often about "gotten" and this is the only time its become unpleasant. And it seems to be two Americans who are being rude, as well as unable to have a proper and interesting discussion.

math I suspect from this thread that grammar is not taught too well in English schools, given the scale of misapprehension that is visible.

That has to be one of the most funny linking of adjectives I've seen in one sentence! Are you trying to be ironic? Is it a deliberate attempt at some kind of obscure similie?

Please tell me where I can view a "scale of misapprehension"! It must surely be worth seeing!

The thing that I notice a lot (which may already have been mentioned several pages back) is "they is" instead of "they are"! Several people at work do this and it makes me want to correct them every time! However, I have a very intelligent, well educated aunt who used to correct me when I was young! It used to annoy me so I now try very hard to resist. I also find gotten irritating. I hadn't met any English person who said it and only really noticed it in speaking to American friends years ago and reading American books.

I normally love these kind of threads but am too tired to read it all right now. I don't mind a gotten. I also love a good learnt and earnt. I don't feel they get used enough.

Orangeyellowgreen, that is what I suspected.

I consider myself lucky to have had the opportunity to learn grammar through Irish in school in Ireland, along with Irish itself. It is perhaps one of the more complex European languages, grammar-wise, with changes of ending in verb tense and person being the least of your worries.
I am Irish, not American.

I too have had discussions on MN about English grammar, and you are right, there is a lot of rudeness here. Never before have I come across such bald statements as 'repulsive' and 'ugly', referring to a mere word, or statements like, 'So you might use it - if you were a dick - when talking about something "we got" but not "I got".'

'I did get' is not correct and if the Danish friend uses it all the time then someone should do him a favour and correct him. Maybe I should judge his friends and acquaintances for being so remiss. I may be misguided to be so judgey, but I am not thick.

You shouldn't struggle with 'gotten' based on verb endings in Dutch or German. It's an English word. The languages parted company quite a while ago. American English does not use 'gotten' for any more tenses than it uses broken, written, forgotten, driven, arisen, beaten, chosen, eaten, stolen, woven, forbidden, forgiven, forsaken, frozen, woken, taken, spoken, shaken, proven, hidden, fallen, etc., all past participles.

All three perfect tenses use a form of 'to have' as an auxiliary --
'Have' or 'has' + past participle of the given verb is the formula for the present perfect tense.
'Had' + past participle is the formula for the past perfect tense.
For the future perfect, 'Will' + 'have' + past participle is the formula.
Along with forms of the auxiliary verb 'to have', can, could, may, might, must, ought to, shall, should, will, and would can be used.
These are the only ways 'gotten' is used in American English or any other form of English. These are also the only ways all the other -en ending irregular verb past participles (partial list ^^) are used in any form of English.

Past, present and future perfect continuous do not use the form 'gotten'. Past, present and future continuous do not use the form, and neither do present, past or future.

Conjugation

Maybe I am being picky (or wrong) here, but you seem to have mixed up the verb 'to get' and the verb 'to have' in your Dutch language example.

'Scale of misapprehension' means 'extent of misapprehension'. Meaning there is lots of it.

I consider myself lucky to have had the opportunity to learn grammar through Irish in school in Ireland, along with Irish itself. It is perhaps one of the more complex European languages, grammar-wise, with changes of ending in verb tense and person being the least of your worries.

Sorry to prick your bubble of conceit. I might be impressed if you informed me that you had learned ancient Greek at school, as a link with reading cuneiform. I did study Greek at school, in Scotland. (strangely enough, the UK is not comprised solely of England). Where "gotten" has never formed part of the English language. And to frank, if I wanted to hear good, if slightly archaic, English grammar, I'd listen to someone from Yorkshire, rather than a Gaelic influenced Irish man or woman. Your notion that a "scale of apprehension" was something that could be described as visible is a typical example of trying to use a Gaelic speech pattern in English, and ending up with a failed mish-mash.

'I did get' is not correct and if the Danish friend uses it all the time then someone should do him a favour and correct him. Maybe I should judge his friends and acquaintances for being so remiss. I may be misguided to be so judgey, but I am not thick.

I'd rather not get a reputation as a boring haranguing harridan, thanks.

Maybe I am being picky (or wrong) here, but you seem to have mixed up the verb 'to get' and the verb 'to have' in your Dutch language example.

Oh hark. You better put out an announcement to the Dutch speaking world that, unless they want be thought of as "dicks", they better all change to using "kreeg" where it should not be used in modern Dutch! Please tell me just exactly what that word is for "get" in Dutch?! This is possibly one of the most conceitedly brilliant pieces of ignorance I have ever read in print.

Its a bit of a shame that, despite all your self proclaimed linguistic and grammatical expertise, you have been singularly unable to work out why Dutch and Danish, as Germanic languages closely related to English, struggle with the equivalent of the word "get" and what has happened to it in those languages. Its closely related to why "gotten" has fallen out of use in modern English, other than colloquially of late. But no, you go on thinking that people from those countries are thick and speaking their own languages wrongly. On that basis, and since you mentioned it, I would have to say its more likely that you are the one who is thick, or more politely, has somehow lost the ability to conceptualise more accurate explanations for the development of language, beyond that which you were taught in school.

I too have had discussions on MN about English grammar, and you are right, there is a lot of rudeness here. Never before have I come across such bald statements as 'repulsive' and 'ugly', referring to a mere word, or statements like, 'So you might use it - if you were a dick - when talking about something "we got" but not "I got".'

Would it be possible for you to discuss a perfectly innocent subject without referring to people as "dicks" and non-native English speakers as being "thick"? You do yourself no favours.

I was never formally taught grammar at school. I went to school in the 1970s when that was out of favour. When I got to university I had no idea what a "noun" was, as I'd never been taught. But can honestly say I have never used the word "gotten". So I'm not sure how much it has to do with having a good grasp of grammar.

It might be regional, though, as I have heard relatives from the SW use it routinely. They'd also say "off of" constantly instead of "from" and that's another repulsive one.

Nothing wrong with reacting to words and describing the feelings you have when reacting, surely? I find "gotten" repulsive, ugly and it makes the person using it sound ignorant. They might not be ignorant, but it has that result. What is wrong with saying you think a word is repulsive? Isn't that the point of language, that we use it to paint pictures, have reactions, create an effect? We also de-code and deconstruct other people's language all the time, eve if it's subconsciously. Again - isn't that what words do?

*even

Well, I would hope that language would help us distinguish between calling a word "repulsive" and a person "a dick".

I did learn grammar at school, in England. I think we were the last year to be taught it formally. The word gotten didn't feature, of that I am sure.

strangely enough, the UK is not comprised solely of England

You have come again to this theme, Chandler. Why? I think everyone on this thread knows this, including those of us who are American or Irish. Do you think we are confusing English as in English language with English as in the people of England? Because we are not.

mathaxiety's last post is the best explanation of "gotten" anywhere on this thread, especially this: American English does not use 'gotten' for any more tenses than it uses broken, written, forgotten, driven, arisen, beaten, chosen, eaten, stolen, woven, forbidden, forgiven, forsaken, frozen, woken, taken, spoken, shaken, proven, hidden, fallen, etc., all past participles. There are some semantic distinctions also explained in other posts that are applicable ("gotten" does not work everywhere a user of British English would use "got" as a past participle.)

if you are looking for a complex European language I suggest you try learning Hungarian

I agree Footle. It's gotten out of hand.

Joffrey:
Using 'gotten' doesn't indicate you have a good grasp of grammar, and that is not being suggested here.
Using it correctly does, as does using the other past participles ending in -en. Even Americans can have a correct grasp of grammar.

You can of course use the word 'repulsive' to describe your reaction to certain words or phrases, but you run the risk of coming across as weirdly angry or upset. Repulsion is a strong response.

Chandler, I quoted Joffrey with the 'dick' comment. It wasn't mine. I used it as an example of gratuitous rudeness on the part of the knee jerk opposition to 'gotten'.

I see you have a bee in your bonnet about Irish too. What a shame there seems to be such snobbery attached to language here. You are no doubt aware of the similarities between Greek and Irish, via Latin. As a means of studying grammar, and practicing it all with a living language, Irish is unequaled. (And maybe Hungarian can join it atop the heap ). It certainly seems to have stood me in good stead here, compared with the confusion and misunderstanding brought on by familiarity with Dutch.

Scale:
'the relative size or extent of something.'
"no one foresaw the scale of the disaster"
synonyms: extent, size, scope, magnitude, dimensions, range, breadth, compass, degree, reach, spread, sweep'
The scale of many phenomena, including misapprehension, can indeed be seen, and very clearly too, in your posts.

Have you studied Irish? Have you studied it enough to allow you to state, 'Your notion that a "scale of apprehension" was something that could be described as visible is a typical example of trying to use a Gaelic speech pattern in English, and ending up with a failed mish-mash.'