Jupiter Images
I can't get anyone to acknowledge that 'bought' is now almost invariably used when 'brought' is correct. E.g.: 'He was "bought" up in . . .'
During one 'Flog It' programme an expert asked a woman who'd brought some silver items to be auctioned: 'Have you bought (sic) the family silver?' Are we really to accept that there's no difference between the past tense of 'to buy' and that of 'to bring'?
Almost as bad is the overuse of 'fantastic'!
![Polling Station signage [Image: kagey b under CC-BY-NC-ND licence]](/openlearn/files/ole/ole_images/places/general-urban-scenes/polling-station-sign/polling station sign_0_0.jpg)
Login or Register to post comments
'bought'
I can't get anyone to acknowledge that 'bought' is now almost invariably used when 'brought' is correct. E.g.: 'He was "bought" up in . . .' During one 'Flog It' programme an expert asked a woman who'd brought some silver items to be auctioned: 'Have you bought (sic) the family silver?' Are we really to accept that there's no difference between the past tense of 'to buy' and that of 'to bring'?
Almost as bad is the overuse of 'fantastic'!
Re: 'bought'
The problem with this expression is that, while both parts of it are verbal: 'could have', no-one pronounces it in this way, with heavy stress on 'have', in normal English speech, whatever their language background. Listen to public speakers, announcers, politicians etc. It is usually pronounced as 'could've'. English is full of verb-contractions like 'we'll' and 'can't', and so it's easy to mistake it for 'could of' as it sounds very similar. In writing, it's normal to spell it 'could have', although if you're writing dialogue in a story or play and want to reproduce your character's manner of speech, writers sometimes use 'could've'.
Re: 'bought'
I notice that the confusion of "bought" with "brought" often goes along with using expression like "on someone's behalf" instead of "on someone's part" and using "beg the question" to mean "ask the question." This seems so common now that it almost seems as if the meanings of these words are changing.
Re: 'bought'
But not as annoying as people who say could of instead of could have
Re: 'bought'
Yes, mixing up "of" and "have" really is not good. Have is a verb, of is not. But I think educational standards at schools today are so poor that people don't even know what a verb is.
Re: 'bought'
am i right in thinking that is an extension of a dialect into written language?
our school teacher told us that it was northern pronunciation of could have, slightly swallowed, that made people think it should be written could of, which in turn has lead to could of being adopted in spoken language...
could of been rubbish, though...
Re: 'bought'
Too many uneducated (and some educated) people mix up bought and brought. I hate it. Bought is the past tense of buy, not bing, and Brought is the past tense of bring not bruy :-)
Buy, Bought
Bring, Brought
To get them mixed up is to suggest that the original words are Bruy and Bing...
Re: 'bought'
We were taught the difference in the fifties too -- with the ultimate incentive of corporal punishment! Fortuately, old pedants like me never have a problem, and we can always be relied on to point out the faults in others' English. This lovely language of ours has enough confusing pairs to keep this thread going for ages.
Re: 'bought'
I agree with you!! I think it reflects the importance that is given to the teaching of English in the schools. Grammar does not seem to be important, the current idea is to get the pupil involved.
Re: 'bought'
Hmmm... not entirely sure how current language on TV reflects anything to do with how English is being taught currently - unless Flog It are employing 11 year-olds to pronounce on the tat brought onto the programme.
Re: 'bought'
At school in the 1980s, it was one of the big things they tried to ensure we wouldn't do - and it's an easy slip to avoid, surely? Bring and buy, you brought and bought...