Re: (In)transitive verbs

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Joe wrote:

> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
> >
> >Strong/weak, yes, but how exactly does "set, set, set" qualify as
> >"regular"?  Regular would be "set, setted, setted".   And there's
> >no regular "-etted" -> -"et" rule: "let" works like "set"; "fret",
> >"jet", "net", and "vet" always keep the -ed; "bet" and "pet" can
> >go either way; and "get" is hopelessly irregular anyway. :)
> >
> >
> >
>
> It is regular.  '-ted' is reduced to 't' in most native Germanic
> verbs(all?).  And 'strong' isn't irregular.  Merely another class, which
> changes vowels rather than prefixes(in English).
No. They're all irregular. If a verb doesn't form its past/past participle
in -ed, it's irregular. It doesn't matter what the justification of it is.

--
Tristan

Replies