Return to "et" page.
- It's legit, but I'm having trouble finding good citations. The past tense of "eat" was often pronounced "et" until the beginning of the 20th century (ish, it may have survived later or died earlier in some places That's still the pronunciation in London (and I don't just mean Cockney) --Enginear 15:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)), and you do occasionally see the spelling "et" in places. It's common enough to be its own entry in m-w collegiate, for example. kurl 13:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Added citations for use; someone else can fix the etymology :-) Jeffqyzt 23:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Although it is pronounced "et" it is spelled "ate". In my view it is sub-standard. I have a feeling that it is a Cornish pronunciation, but I may be wrong. I am marking it as sub-standard and deleting the etymology. Andrew massyn 21:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I recently spotted an article that mentions the older (and still standard and correct in British English) prononciation of 'ate' as 'et'. Pronouncing 'ate' as 'et' is compared to similar mistakes like pronouncing 'schedule' as 'schedule' rather than 'shedule'. ‘Ate’ or ‘Et’? British Library mulls pronunciation User:Wight1984 13:08, 30 Decemner 2010 (GMT)
- The problem is finding good cites. In retrospect I shouldn't have put the "dialect-speak" quotes. I know I've seen it used without the conscious effort to be "in dialect", but in searching for quotes you get swamped by all the Latin and French references. FWIW, my grandmother sometimes says (and writes) "et" when I would use "ate", and we're from Missouri, not Texas, so if nothing else our degeneracy is widespread :-) Best I can find at the moment are the following; at least they're not "Mrs. Wiggs and the Cabbage Patch" Jeffqyzt 13:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- 1896: Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), Tom Sawyer, Detective 
- Well, the man was astonished, of course; and first off he looked like he didn't know whether to be scared, or glad, or both, or which, but finally he settled down to being glad; and then his color come back, though at first his face had turned pretty white. So we got to talking together while he et his breakfast.
- 1907: O. Henry Seats of the Haughty 
- "'Boss,' says the cabby, 'I et a steak in that restaurant once. If you're real hungry, I advise you to try the saddle-shops first.'
- I tried searching for "et yet" and found several, including the 'Ain’t You Et Yet Cafe' and 'Billy Joe Slade asked, “Y’et yet?”' —Stephen 13:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm in favor of removing the "sub-standard" indicator. The problem I have with marking it "sub-standard" is that it implies that there exist somewhere standards to be followed; of course, there are any number of style guides, but they don't necessarily agree with each other, especially as they differ in the time and space of their publication. User:Andrew massyn, perhaps you could reference one of them with specific regard to "et"? Also, the word is already marked as colloquial which indicates that is not for formal use, and may be only regionally understood. In that case, isn't sub-standard redundant? Jeffqyzt 18:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. I'm moving the cites into the main article in favor of the child-lit cites. For convenient reference, the previous cites were:
- 1902: Alice Caldwell Hegan Rice, Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch
- an' then I et the stove-polish, that 's four times; an' I can't 'member, but the nex' time will be seven. I don't keer how much I git killed, till it 's eight times, then I 'm goin' to be good all the time, 'cause when you are dead nine times they put you in a hole an' throw dirt on you!
- 1902: Calvin Stewart, Uncle Josh Weathersby's "Punkin Centre Stories"
- ...after that things went along purty well fer a right smart while, then I et a snack out of my carpet bag...
- Modifying "sub-standard" to "informal"; NPOV. Jeffqyzt 18:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- The term substandard doesn’t imply that there exist somewhere standards to be followed that in reality do not exist. It’s a linguistic term of art that means "noting or pertaining to a dialect, word, construction, or other feature of usage that is often considered by others to mark its user as uneducated or socially inferior. Almost everyone (here at least) uses words such as et and ain't frequently and deliberately, usually to achieve a certain effect, but whenever we encounter someone who uses these words consistently, unconsciously, in every circumstance, we tend to think of that person as an uneducated hick. The word substandard does not imply that the user of a word so labeled is of inferior intellect, but it accurately describes the way educated native speakers view someone who uses such words too frequently or under the wrong circumstances. The term informal means that it’s okay for most people (anyone who is not a professional speaker or radio announcer) to use the word or construction constantly and without restraint. I use these words as often as anyone I know, but calling them informal rather than substandard is a completely inaccurate and inappropriate promotion of the word to a level of standardization that will make the person who falls for the informal label look like a fool. Because substandard is a technical word used in linguistics that means something very specific and real, and is not at all the same thing as informal, I don’t think you should recategorize words such as et this way. It is substandard, not informal. —Stephen 23:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, but if so, we should add a definition of the linguistic sense at substandard or sub-standard. Since neither has a primary definition, it falls to the reader to determine the meaning from sub- + standard which definitely has the negative connotation. Perhaps the term dialectal would be preferable? I'll modify article to this for the time being, as it seems more accurate. If you feel that substandard should be used instead, please modify accordingly once a definition exists. Jeffqyzt 07:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)