To think that the past tense of the verb to text is texted, not text!

[Marmitelover55]

Assuming it is actually a verb and not a noun...

But quickstep has equal emphasis on the second syllable in order to say the word "quick step" - "texted" is not "text ed" as two equally emphasised words. The final "e" in "texted" should be a schwa vowel (unpronounced "e") but ends up being "textid" because the word's hard to say.

If the word was "teck-stead" then it would be far easier to say. Like Hampstead. The "ted" is not pronounced like "ted" though.

But the fact that the second syllable is less emphasised makes no difference to the tongue position. And it's no more difficult to say that second "e" than when you say "tested" or "rested".

Any ED past tense ending following a stem which finishes in T or D can be pronounced with either schwa (neutral sound which can represent ANY unstressed vowel) (not unpronounced) + /d/ or /id/. They are both correct.

It is harder to say "kstd" is harder to say than "estd". Can't you see that?

Quickstep's main stress is also on the first syllable, the same as texted. True, the second syllable of quickstep is stronger than the second in texted, but that's because quickstep is a compound noun.

Nobody is trying to say that though. Because the schwa or /i/ is there.

It is harder to say "kstd" is harder to say than "estd". Can't you see that?

I'm really not being deliberately thick, but I don't quite know what you're saying there. It seems to me that it is perfectly easy to say "teck sted". And it is extremely easy to write "texted".

Yes I'm aware it's a compound noun which I why it has more emphasis on the second half of the word than "ed" in "texted" as that was the example given.

And yes there is a schwa or /I/ sound in between, but it is the pronunciation of the consonants that I was referring to. So it's harder to say "ksted" than "ested".

It doesn't take a doctorate in linguistics to understand that. If it's being warped and changed by millions then it's because it's awkward to say.

I don't like it being used as a verb at all! I'd say sent a text.

I've never thought about it but I guess I say both 'text' and 'texted' depending on the situation. But I'm another person from a 'wunt, cunt, shunt, dunt' area, and will change between colloquial and formal dialect subconsciously. I think, if I'm honest, it's really not a big deal. Language has an element of fluidity, sorry.

Thank you for clarifying. Your terminology was a bit off. Of course it's more difficult to pronounce /k/ +/s/ + /t/ than it is to pronounce just 2 consonants /s/+ /t/.

Doesn't change the ED which comes after though.

I'm so behind the times that I didn't realise 'text' is now an officially recognised verb. I'd have said 'sent a text message' is the correct form.

I may sound like an antiquated old fart, but I still use 'text messaged' as I refuse to acknowledge 'text' as a verb!

Xp, inertia. Glad it's not just me!

Iguana

Your Terry Wogan example is slightly different, I think.

Broadcasters have taken to using the present tense to convey immediacy, relevance or excitement. Like a Newspaper headline. It's really common when Historians are discussing past event e.g. 'In 1939 the German Reich is at its most powerful. Hitler decides to invade Poland'

It irritates the hell out of me - it's an unnecessary linguistic device and it sometimes causes confusion. I often have to switch off Radio 4 because it bugs me so much

Also, it's such a new word that of course it's been listed as a regular verb with the past tense 'texted', but language evolves with us, not the other way round. Since it appears the majority (as in, not just MN users) use 'text', perhaps we'll find that listed as the correct past tense fairly soon. We've recently managed to change the definition for literally, for example. The speakers dictate the language.

When I mentioned Terry Wogan it was not with regards to the pronunciation of "texted" , it was a side mention in response to Ziggy.

Iguana

I did not read Ziggy's post. I am basically agreeing with the pair of you about the annoying use of the present tense.

(you sound a bit annoyed - I'm not arguing with you!)

Oh, I am wholeheartedly in agreement that language changes, and things considered 'wrong' become 'right' over time. I imagine 'text' in any form will be considered archaic anyway within about 20 years, if not before.

Count me in as another one who hates the use of the present tense in history programmes. It's even more irritating when they mix it up, e.g. "Henry VIII was worried the church would not agree to a divorce. He decides to leave the Catholic church and go ahead and marry Anne Boleyn. But it didn't help him achieve his ambition of fathering a male heir".

IguanaTail, have you never been to Hickstead? Or Thaxted?

Where I live it's usual to say 'treat' (pronounced 'trett') instead of 'treated', as in 'I treat myself to a new coat' or 'He treat me badly'. Drives me nuts.

And it's 'texted'.

Yes, I'm a pedant and proud

Eastmids No. Have you?

Narp - I'm not really annoyed, I was just a bit frustrated that my example (made up) word of "faxted" kept being raised as not a real word and so irrelevant.

Anyway... at the moment the debate is all slightly irrelevant as "texted" is the accepted word by the dictionary.

Texted is not difficult to say, what a ridiculous objection. I've just said it ten times quickly with no bother and I'm half cut.