A challenge to authors!

...particularly American authors. Try and write a book without using the word 'gotten'! Or if you're English the word 'got'. Or am I the only one who finds them intensely irritating and a mark of laziness?

The over-reliance on any one word to the exclusion of its synonyms may be an indication of laziness. But I think the other extreme would be just as annoying.

Edited for HTML.

I find them irritating, but not because of laziness - I just don't care for the way they sound. There are so many beautiful words that can be used, and then there's 'got' and 'gotten.' ;)

>1 Boussiroux:, I'm not sure that I understand the problem. Is it that you think "got" and "gotten" are improper past and past participle (respectively) forms of the verb "to get"? Are they non-standard in some other way? Or do you personally just not like the way they sound? If the latter, what makes you think that your opinion is of such import that anyone would accept your "challenge"? Do you object to the use of "got" and "gotten" in dialogue, or only in narration? Are you really so sure that there presently exist no specimens of American literature that avoid the use of "gotten"? If such a work exists (and I'm fairly certain that one does), why challenge anyone to write another one?

Got and gotten are perfectly cromulent words.

fleela, I don't know the word "cromulent," but I like the sound of it. Have you submitted that to the following thread? http://www.librarything.com/topic/58757

I'm with polutropon: I don't "get" what it is you object to or how a particular past or past participle form equates to laziness. Can you give a couple examples to put it into context? Do you find irritating: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son"?

On another tack, in this LT group, I've been campaigning to explain that linguistics is all about the love of language, not complaining and judging. However, if you insist on starting yet another "judging" thread, my prescriptive school teachers would have shuddered at your usage of "try and" as opposed to "try to."

"Cromulent", grammaragoddess, is from the "Simpson's" Television show. See:

http://www.cracked.com/article_15269_from-cromulent-craptacular-top-12-simpsons-...

lends grammargoddess a ruler

Robert

I don't think it could be done without dropping realistic dialogue/voice. "Gotten laid" comes to mind, closely followed by "got out of the car".

But then, does your complaint extend to phrasal verbs? But it must. Why else do people use "gotten" in the first place?

Alot of changes that happen in manuscripts are the work of the editor!

Speaking as a Brit, I rather like 'gotten', a relict of an older British English. I prefer it because 'got' is not only lazy, which indeed it is, but also pain ugly to my ear.

>13 Collectorator:, Good usage note. But since no *actual* ruler was involved, isn't there a sense in which the "ruler" at issue was the object of a merely "figurative transaction," in which case "lends" is the correct verb?

;-)

What a good group this is.

>16 polutropon:

A group, indeed, in which the medium is definitely the massage!

Clifford.

He got up, got dressed, got his breakfast. He then got on his horse. When he got to his destination.....

He arose, dressed himself and ate his breakfast. He mounted his horse. When he arrived at his destination...

I'm paraphrasing something that someone else wrote many years ago. My objection is that in many instances where "got" and "gotten" are employed there are other more appropriate verbs that should be used. Of course, both are perfectly good words but only in the correct context.

>19 Boussiroux:. It's the should-ness of your comment that is bothersome. Sure, "He arose and dressed himself," is perfectly grammatical English, but the feel of it is not-so-faintly Victorian. If you were trying to describe what goes on in a college dorm room when the alarm clock sounds, it wouldn't do at all. You'd say, "He got up and got dressed."

So yeah, it's a problem if the author uses "got" or "gotten" when something more demure is called for, but it's also a problem if he fails to use them where laxity is called for. Of course, if you're just advocating that authors should try to use the right word at the right time, I doubt you'll get many disagreements.

Hmm, "Mount up on your horsey, and get on out of here." Seems to be missing something... ;)

(Okay, I guess you didn't specifically dictate dialogue had to be free of the offending word... :) )

"He got dressed" feels very right and natural to me. "He dressed himself" brings to mind something a mother would excitedly say of her three-year-old, meaning he finally didn't need to be dressed by someone else. Perhaps that's just me, though. For economy, I'd lean toward "He dressed."

"demure"? How about using a little variety? Using "got" for every other verb is boooooooring!

>23 erilarlo:, First of all, nobody has suggested that a good writer would use "got" for every other verb. A good writer uses the right word at the right time. Secondly, variety is not the only standard by which word choice is measured; I rather like the sound of the sentence, "He got up and got dressed," though that may just be a matter of personal taste. It has a pleasant symmetry, an up-then-down-ness to it that I like.

Finally, I stand by my own word choice: I think "demure" does accurately capture the connotative difference between, "He arose and dressed himself," and, "He got up and got dressed."

LOL. When I was a kid my brother and I had this game where we tried to never use the word "what." It got tough after a while....

"Please tell me the title of that thing in the corner."
"I don't understand the thing you said."
"Please say that again?"
Sounds awkward!

25 - okay, that game sounds fucking amazing and I'm TOTALLY gonna bring it up with my friends.

Grab your coat and procure your hat Leave your worries on the doorstep Life can be so sweet . . .

#13 On the subject of loan, loaned and lend, I once has an assistant who said to me "I borrowed him my car".

I don't know where he picked up that doozy but I have heard it before. Hopefully it is exclusively Australian. :)

Nope, I've heard it (rarely, and usually from younger people who enjoy wordplay (two slightly overlapping sets)) in the US. New England and Northern California - but it was some of the same people (one of them my sister) in both places, so the California one may have been a result of exposure to her.

What I find irritating is when some people (whilst perhaps trying to sound superior?) say or write "try and" rather than "try to".

As they say, "different strokes for different folks" I guess.

EDIT: My Goodness! I just noticed that the original message was posted months and months ago!

So? Still interesting. That's one of the nice things about LT - a conversation can end and then restart with new participants months later.

This has really gotten on my nerves!