Languages are dynamic

tuxy

English is dynamic just like most spoken languages. New words are created, the structure of sentences are altered.
Something I have noticed is that the phrases "I seen" and "I done" are now more common than I "I saw" or "I did"
Is it time for us to move on and officially accept the most common usage?

Gerrup Outta Dat!

tuxy wrote: »

English is dynamic just like most spoken languages. New words are created, the structure of sentences are altered.
Something I have noticed is that the phrases "I seen" and "I done" are now more common than I "I saw" or "I did"
Is it time for us to move on and officially accept the most common usage?

No, it’s just ignorance, not a genuine linguistic shift.

RayM

Unless it prevents you from understanding what the person is trying to say, I think it's fine. Rules surrounding language are there to be broken.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

The excuse for misuse of grammar or spelling has become, in recent years, that language evolves but it's generally just that - an excuse.

tuxy

Gerrup Outta Dat! wrote: »

No, it’s just ignorance, not a genuine linguistic shift.

But there are many factors that can drive the shift. Is ignorance not a possible factor? If the majority of people change the way they speak even if it is through ignorance could you not be the ignorant one for not adapting?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

RayM wrote: »

Unless it prevents you from understanding what the person is trying to say, I think it's fine. Rules surrounding language are there to be broken.

Mes no tinking dats de way towars best ways two get understood.

tomwaterford

If they mean the same thing...what difference do it make??


Should be like the pirate option on facebook

LLMMLL

"I seen" is a proper regional variation. It's not a mistake or ignorance.

Allinall

It's bad grammar .

Just because more people do be doing it doesn't make it not bad grammar.

tuxy

LLMMLL wrote: »

"I seen" is a proper regional variation. It's not a mistake or ignorance.

Which region does it belong to?

alchemist33

Accept this and you'll then have to accept all sorts of popular horrors as proper language, even the ridiculous "could of, should of, would of."

Omackeral

No, it is absolutely not time to accept incorrect usage. We live in a time where information is literally at our fingertips and it seemingly has just dumbed the masses down. The grammar and spelling I see on official documentation in my civil service job is utterly appalling.

People who write "could of" and "would of" need an immediate lesson on the errors of their ways quickly.

mfceiling

Mariam Unkempt Thief wrote: »

The excuse for misuse of grammar or spelling has become, in recent years, that language evolves but it's generally just that - an excuse.

Ahhhh there their they're

Omackeral

mfceiling wrote: »

Ahhhh there their they're

It's actually

tuxy

If it's just ignorance is it ever acceptable to correct people on this ignorance?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

tuxy wrote: »

If it's just ignorance is it ever acceptable to correct people on this ignorance?

Of course there will be circumstances where it is not only acceptable but imperative that corrections are made. At other tines it's just a matter of cringing and carrying on regardless.

Zaph

tuxy wrote: »

English is dynamic just like most spoken languages. New words are created, the structure of sentences are altered.
Something I have noticed is that the phrases "I seen" and "I done" are now more common than I "I saw" or "I did"
Is it time for us to move on and officially accept the most common usage?

No, English clearly needs to be taught better in school.

wakka12

The only people I hear say I seen or I done it are knackers

PowerToWait

tuxy wrote: »

If it's just ignorance is it ever acceptable to correct people on this ignorance?

It's called learning.

amcalester

Mariam Unkempt Thief wrote: »

Of course there will be circumstances where it is not only acceptable but imperative that corrections are made. At other tines it's just a matter of cringing and carrying on regardless.

...times...

Don’t think this is one of those times though.

amcalester

wakka12 wrote: »

The only people I hear say I seen or I done it are knackers

When has a knacker ever admitted to seeing or doing anything?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

amcalester wrote: »

...times...

Don’t think this is one of those times though.

There's also a massive difference between a typographical error and poor grammar or spelling. Each is usually quite obvious in it's own way.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

PowerToWait wrote: »

It's called learning.

Or teaching, even.

LLMMLL

tuxy wrote: »

Which region does it belong to?

Kildare/Carlow it's very common. It's quite widespread as far as I know.

BrokenArrows

Wrong is wrong. The SMS message destroyed a whole generations ability to form a proper sentence. I still see it in friends of mine who will still send me txt spk and these are people in their 30's with good jobs and education and are no longer restricted by character limits.

I see it on boards all the time. "Sorry about my grammar but on I'm my phone". That's not an excuse anymore.
"Sorry can't post a link I'm on my phone. " you can post links with your phone. Its just laziness.

amcalester

Mariam Unkempt Thief wrote: »

There's also a massive difference between a typographical error and poor grammar or spelling. Each is usually quite obvious in it's own way.

Absolutely, my post was nothing more than a playful nudge.

LLMMLL

Zaph wrote: »

No, English clearly needs to be taught better in school.

Nobody learns their spoken English in school. Every single child speaks the language before they start.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

LLMMLL wrote: »

Kildare/Carlow it's very common. It's quite widespread as far as I know.

It's certainly widespread, but that doesn't make it a regional variation. Indeed, the fact that the error is so widespread rules it out as a regional variation completely.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

amcalester wrote: »

Absolutely, my post was nothing more than a playful nudge.

And was taken as such. Though, it raised an important distinction worthy of mention.

LLMMLL

Mariam Unkempt Thief wrote: »

It's certainly widespread, but that doesn't make it a regional variation. Indeed, the fact that the error is so widespread rules it out as a regional variation completely.

At worst you'd call it a specofically Irish variation. It can definitely be classed as regional. Also its not an error.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

LLMMLL wrote: »

At worst you'd call it a specofically Irish variation. It can definitely be classed as regional. Also its not an error.

It's not an Irish variation. I've heard it in Britain and the US.

LLMMLL

Mariam Unkempt Thief wrote: »

It's not an Irish variation. I've heard it in Britain and the US.

You've heard different versions of it in these places. For example BEV (black English vernacular) that you would hear in the states has a much more varied use of these verbs than anyone in the Ireland or UK, and one of those would be "I seen it", but the origins are different.

housetypeb

"He was sat on the ..." instead of "He was sitting on the ..." seems to be a popular abomination too.

LLMMLL

housetypeb wrote: »

"He was sat on the ..." instead of "He was sitting on the ..." seems to be a popular abomination too.

That's a particularly British variation. Again not an error.

Ipso

From Old English to Modern English.

http://www.openculture.com/2014/10/hear-beowulf-read-in-the-original-old-english.html

nuac

housetypeb wrote: »

"He was sat on the ..." instead of "He was sitting on the ..." seems to be a popular abomination too.

imho that, and similar constructions, are Hiberno-English. Common in the West

I was at boarding school and UCG with guys whose first language was Irish. They also used similar constructions.