'I done me homework' instead of 'I did my homework',

'I seen me sister' instead of 'I saw my sister'



Please do not say that this will become totally acceptable......! Please!

_________________

It’s perfectly logical, diachronically speaking.

English long ago lost the distinction (in weak verbs) between the preterite form and the past passive participle. Since they’re identical, the only difference between the past and perfect tenses is the presence or absence of the auxiliary verb: “I [have] dined”, for example.

It’s only natural that, in the strong verbs that still maintain a difference between the two forms, the same system will sooner or later be applied. In some cases (like “I [have] seen/done”), the participle has been chosen as the form to be used; in others (as in “I [have] wrote” or “I [have] went” in some American dialects), the preterite form was generalised.

Whether or not this will catch on and be generalised to all verbs, at least in some forms of English, is anyone’s guess. It hasn’t yet, but it may yet do so. So you might as well prepare for the fact that in two generations’ time, “I have wrote” or “I chosen” could be perfectly common, standard phrases.

_________________
Not a native speaker.

Always wait for at least three people to agree on a translation, especially if it’s for something permanent.

My translations are usually GU (Ulster Irish), unless CO (Standard Orthography) is requested.

I think these phrases are unlikely to become accepted as part of the official standard, but who knows?! They are exactly the kinds of examples I hear around me daily. They are so common, in fact, that I can absolutely accept them as part of a dialect. I think it would be wrong of me to correct my friends who hear and use these phrases on a daily basis. Who am I to say they are wrong? I can only say that they are using 'non-standard' English and to be honest, I doubt they would care.

'Me and John are going to town'. For quite a while now, the idea of insisting on 'John and I..' has been seen as pedantic, but is still pushed by some English teachers. It's just another example of language changing, like the shall/will thing or even spellings:gaol/jail, connexion/connection... One last one that gets me: 'Fine toothcomb' as opposed to Fine-tooth(ed) comb. Supposedly it's pedantic to find fault with the first nonsensical version of the phrase. Guilty as charged!

Who knows, indeed.

Many verbs have changed their conjugations in the history of the English language: strong verbs become weak (like ‘wrought’ which is now pretty much gone, in favour of worked), and weak verbs become strong (like ‘strove’, which is now more common than ‘strived’, though both still coexist).

The only verb I can think of where the preterite and past participles have been levelled in the exact manner of “I seen/done” is ‘to bind’: nowadays, it’s “I [have] bound”; but if it hadn’t been conflated at some point, it ought to have been “I band/bound” (it had two past tenses in Old English), but “I have bund”—very similar to ‘sing/sang/sung’, for example. But there is some precedence for this kind of system developing in English, and as ‘bind’ shows, sometimes the ‘wrong’ forms do completely take over from the ‘correct’ forms, which are subsequently lost entirely.

_________________
Not a native speaker.

Always wait for at least three people to agree on a translation, especially if it’s for something permanent.

My translations are usually GU (Ulster Irish), unless CO (Standard Orthography) is requested.

Yes, people simplify the verbal form through time and they become the norm.

Was Connachta "feicfidh mé" a correct form? No! But it has become right in Connachta.
Was it right to say "sa bhaile"? No, "ins an bhaile" was right
Etc.

What is considered correct in Modern English, was wrong 200 years ago or so
Anyway, Old English had declensions and conjugations, so even "I saw my sister" was wrong once.

Should be : ic seah mine sweostor (or something like that)

_________________
Is fearr Gaeilg na Gaeltaċta ná Gaeilg ar biṫ eile
Agus is í Gaeilg Ġaoṫ Doḃair is binne

This may be the place to have a query of mine answered.

I notice that when in America I would always say 'If I had gone to the store'. or 'if I had done that', etc. an American would say 'if I would have gone to the store' or 'if I would have done that'. Which is correct ? or are they both correct ? or does anyone really care or notice except me ?

Also I always say 'while I was sitting there', but I notice that English people usually say 'while I was sat there'. Can anyone answer these questions for me please ?

At least it is right in the dialects these people are speaking.
Now, is it right in standard English? That's another problem.

According to what I learnt at school, you would rather say "if I had gone" (not "if I would have gone") and "while I was sitting" (not "while I was sat"). But I'm not too good in English grammar And once again, if people say that naturally, it means it's right in their dialect.

_________________
Is fearr Gaeilg na Gaeltaċta ná Gaeilg ar biṫ eile
Agus is í Gaeilg Ġaoṫ Doḃair is binne

Yeah, I've often noticed that difference between American English and Hiberno-English regarding 'would'. In English, I say: 'If I won lots of money, I'd be happy'. (Some?) Americans say 'If I would win ...' - or at least I've heard something similar.

The American way is more logical really, but I'm not likely to start using that version soon, as it would sound completely unnatural coming from me. I do however make reference to it when trying to teach the Modh Coinníollach - as students will actually use the Past Tense to translate 'If I won...' (since in English we use the Past Tense form in this kind of sentence).

And British English puzzles me too (or at least one dialect of it)!

'I was sat there' always sounds weird to me, as does 'This job needs doing' (instead of '...needs to be done').

And why do they pronounce sixth as sith? ... and presume as preshume? ...and Australia as Australiar.

And then they slag us for resisting the th sound!

American English can top the second of those examples for oddity. In Pennsylvania and parts of nearby states (and lately I've noticed it popping up in places to which people from that area have subsequently wandered), they say things like "This house needs painted".

The only thing I can figure out as to the origin of that (and this is a pure guess) is the strong influence of German in that area, at least in the past, where a Pennsylvania German sentence like "Dieses Haus braucht gestrichen zu werden" (literally: "This house needs painted to be"), got shortened to a Pennsylvania English "This house needs painted" as people gradually gave up speaking German. It would be interesting to see whether other parts of the US which were once heavily German-speaking, such as parts of the Midwest, have the same type of expression, but I'm less familiar with those areas.

_________________
I'm not a native (or entirely fluent) speaker, so be sure to wait for confirmations/corrections, especially for tattoos.

Maybe it's just a shortening of "this house needs te be painted"?

_________________
Is fearr Gaeilg na Gaeltaċta ná Gaeilg ar biṫ eile
Agus is í Gaeilg Ġaoṫ Doḃair is binne