- Joined
- Nov 2, 2007
- Messages
- 6,449
- Reaction score
- 1,321
It's wrong now, in terms of preferred US usage.
It wasn't wrong at the time it was written, which was many decades ago.
A word question (gotten vs. got?)
- Thread starter Wayne K
- Start date
- Status
It's wrong now, in terms of preferred US usage.
It wasn't wrong at the time it was written, which was many decades ago.
It's not like slang; it has a specific meaning, because it's used in particular tenses that themselves have specific meaning. And if that's the meaning you need, there's no other way to get it--not in American English, anyway.
As for your sentences, "I had gotten some ice cream" means you obtained (e.g., bought) ice cream before some other thing happened. For example, "I had just gotten some ice cream when a car came crashing through the window of the Baskin-Robbins." But "I had some ice cream" doesn't mean "before X other thing happened," and it generally means you ate ice cream: "I had some ice cream for dessert." In some contexts, it can mean you had a container of ice cream with you (in your hand, in your shopping bag...): "I had some ice cream, but I don't know where it went--I must've left that shopping bag in the cart instead of loading it into the car!"
Because the simple past doesn't have the meaning of "X happened before Y happened," you can't say "I had some ice cream when a car came crashing through..." That's just not correct; you need to use the past perfect in a sentence like that. The specific meaning of the past perfect is "X happened before Y happened," so that's the tense you need in a sentence like this--and as a result, if you use "get" in that sentence, you need to say "had gotten."
The same is true of the other tenses mentioned here--have gotten (present perfect), would have gotten (conditional type 3), etc. All those tenses have specific meanings--the choice of tense tells you about when and how the verb occurred. So it's not slang, it's just grammar.
That actually illustrates another point too. In sentences where you could use either "to get" or "to be," using "get" can imply that there's some blame or credit to go around for whatever follows "get," while using "to be" is more neutral. I read this in some dictionary, and I remember the examples:
"The demonstrators were arrested." --Totally neutral and factual.
"The demonstrators got arrested." --Factual, but with a slight sense of blame--either blaming the demonstrators or blaming the cops.
"The demonstrators got themselves arrested." --Factual, but with a definite sense of blaming the demonstrators.
Last edited:
No doubt it's outdated. But I find it difficult to believe the argument that "had got" is always and absolutely incorrect in US usage, anymore than "had gotten" is always and absolutely incorrect in Canadian usage. One is more acceptable and widely used than another -- and taught in grammar classes -- but not totally incorrect. Your post says "preferred," and I conceded that point some dozen posts ago.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2007
- Messages
- 6,449
- Reaction score
- 1,321
None of the major style guides currently in use in the US permit it, so even if one's manuscript made it to a US publisher with "had got" in it, a copyeditor would almost certainly take it out.
That said, it's not a solecism. And you probably wouldn't lose marks on a test or essay for it.
So both you and ideagirl are right: you're right in that some people in the US probably still think it's correct, and she's right in that publishing outlets in the US follow style guides that identify it as incorrect.
I think I keep accidentally contradicting you, which I'm not trying to do. But you're right, sometimes it works.
Looks like I started a little controversy and stirred the argument. I really wasn't trying to do that. To be honest, I really don't like the word in my writing and most of it is a casual creative tone, because I hate formal writing. It's just one of those words I hate using unless it's dialouge or first person. JMHO. In the great words of someone and I forget who, "Agree to disagree."
English Language Trivia:
According to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, "gotten" appears twenty-five times in the King James Version of the Bible. So I'd say it probably didn't originate on the American side of the pond.
I gotta get a life....
According to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, "gotten" appears twenty-five times in the King James Version of the Bible. So I'd say it probably didn't originate on the American side of the pond.
I gotta get a life....
After reading all of this my head is spinning. But thank you all for feedback, it's been one heck of an English lesson.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 18,805
- Reaction score
- 4,600
- Location
- Caledonia
- Website
- derekpaterson.net
Mine too!
I think it might have helped if you'd mentioned up front your nationality and/or where you intend to submit your mss. when it's finished (heck, that might help a lot of threads here) so folks don't get sidetracked by discussing whatever rules and foibles apply in their own region but don't really help answer your question.
-Derek
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 18,805
- Reaction score
- 4,600
- Location
- Caledonia
- Website
- derekpaterson.net
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 28,750
- Reaction score
- 2,937
- Location
- right here
- Website
- www.veinglory.com
yes, gotten is an archaic use in the UK, but you would have trouble finding an extant user of it there or one from the last century. In fact I remember finding it corrected with some outrage (exclamation points added) by pencil weilding users of Scottish public library books.
I would like to have seen the original sentence that is giving you trouble. There is always a way around using the word 'gotten' except, as illustrated above 'ill-gotten'.
As for CaroGirl'ss post "I have gotten a book every Christmas since I was three.' There is always 'received' and 'been given'.
As for CaroGirl'ss post "I have gotten a book every Christmas since I was three.' There is always 'received' and 'been given'.
Warning: over-analysis alert!!
Original sentence: "He would have gotten the same results if he had just asked."
I think if anything feels less than smooth here, it's the "would have" rather than the "gotten." The sentence conveys, at least to me, a feeling of detachment.
What you could do with it depends on whether you're doing a third person POV right from the character's head, or letting the character describe someone else's actions, but it might be easiest to try another spin.
Ex: Three months down the drain, he told himself bitterly. And Barclay had it tucked away in that silicon brain-chip of his all this time.
Original sentence: "He would have gotten the same results if he had just asked."
I think if anything feels less than smooth here, it's the "would have" rather than the "gotten." The sentence conveys, at least to me, a feeling of detachment.
What you could do with it depends on whether you're doing a third person POV right from the character's head, or letting the character describe someone else's actions, but it might be easiest to try another spin.
Ex: Three months down the drain, he told himself bitterly. And Barclay had it tucked away in that silicon brain-chip of his all this time.
Warning: over-analysis alert!!
This thread took on a life of it's own. If you read the whole thing, it's really very interesting.
- Status