• Sabata@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    I like OPs version better and chose to evolve the language that way.

    • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      If only a very small handful of people make the same mistake, it doesn’t evolve the language, it’s just a mistake, plain and simple.

      I know you’re just trying to make yourself feel a wee bit morally superior by saying that, but it’s the complete opposite of how language evolution works

        • Default_Defect@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          People have varying degrees of ability to understand outside of what they know, what is “good enough” for you might be incomprehensible to someone else.

    • addie@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah; as a native and fairly well-educated speaker, I’m fucked if I can form the past participles of some of our verbs

      If I swim across a river, is it now the swimmed river? Swum river? Swam river?

      If I sneak into a room, have I sneaked? Snuck? Both sound wrong.

      Didn’t find anything ambiguous about ‘costed’, it works for me.

      • Censored@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you swim across a river, it is now a river you’ve swum. If you sneak into a room, you have snuck in.

        Those are correct but they look and sound wrong.

      • palordrolap@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Would some variant of “snauk(t)” or “snaught” work for you? Your brain might be expecting ablaut in the style of “teach” / “taught” or “catch” / “caught” rather than that of “sing” / “sung”.

        How do you feel about “(p)reached”? “Snaked”?

        A fun fact about “caught” is that it’s a relative neologism. It uh, caught on after people decided they didn’t like “catched” for whatever reason. (I guess it has something to do with tangibility / concreteness. Most other -atch words are used for objects.)

    • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I prefer cost, not sure why but it just feels more natural and easier for me to say. But I am not a native speaker if it means anything.