Fun fact, ‘cost’ is a regular verb in Canadian English. Infering from the lemmy.ca instance, the comment op might be a Canadian, which means the usage of ‘costed’ is correct.
If only a very small handful of people make the same mistake, it doesn’t evolve the language, it’s just a mistake, plain and simple.
I know you’re just trying to make yourself feel a wee bit morally superior by saying that, but it’s the complete opposite of how language evolution works
People have varying degrees of ability to understand outside of what they know, what is “good enough” for you might be incomprehensible to someone else.
Would some variant of “snauk(t)” or “snaught” work for you? Your brain might be expecting ablaut in the style of “teach” / “taught” or “catch” / “caught” rather than that of “sing” / “sung”.
How do you feel about “(p)reached”? “Snaked”?
A fun fact about “caught” is that it’s a relative neologism. It uh, caught on after people decided they didn’t like “catched” for whatever reason. (I guess it has something to do with tangibility / concreteness. Most other -atch words are used for objects.)
Removed by mod
I love free English classes…
Free education? Hell yeah brother!
Learning is great, especially when it costed nothing!
Fun fact, ‘cost’ is a regular verb in Canadian English. Infering from the lemmy.ca instance, the comment op might be a Canadian, which means the usage of ‘costed’ is correct.
Source: https://grammarist.com/usage/costed/
Removed by mod
I like OPs version better and chose to evolve the language that way.
If only a very small handful of people make the same mistake, it doesn’t evolve the language, it’s just a mistake, plain and simple.
I know you’re just trying to make yourself feel a wee bit morally superior by saying that, but it’s the complete opposite of how language evolution works
It’s not a mistake if I can understand the message.
It’s still a mistake, no matter whether yo cn undrstnd th sntnce
People have varying degrees of ability to understand outside of what they know, what is “good enough” for you might be incomprehensible to someone else.
Yeah; as a native and fairly well-educated speaker, I’m fucked if I can form the past participles of some of our verbs
If I swim across a river, is it now the swimmed river? Swum river? Swam river?
If I sneak into a room, have I sneaked? Snuck? Both sound wrong.
Didn’t find anything ambiguous about ‘costed’, it works for me.
so if I understand correctly, the past participle of drag is… cabaret?
If you swim across a river, it is now a river you’ve swum. If you sneak into a room, you have snuck in.
Those are correct but they look and sound wrong.
Snuck
Would some variant of “snauk(t)” or “snaught” work for you? Your brain might be expecting ablaut in the style of “teach” / “taught” or “catch” / “caught” rather than that of “sing” / “sung”.
How do you feel about “(p)reached”? “Snaked”?
A fun fact about “caught” is that it’s a relative neologism. It uh, caught on after people decided they didn’t like “catched” for whatever reason. (I guess it has something to do with tangibility / concreteness. Most other -atch words are used for objects.)
I prefer cost, not sure why but it just feels more natural and easier for me to say. But I am not a native speaker if it means anything.