This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Somewhere in this set of edits Drmies added
(citing Di Paolo).
That (and much else) got scrambled 53 weeks later, by some IP who didn't know what they were doing. The result makes no sense to me. Like so much crap in Wikipedia, it lived on.
Here's what Di Paolo writes:
I'm about to revert to the Drmies version. -- Hoary ( talk) 11:32, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Here you'll find a bulky and lovingly crafted footnote that, I'm pretty sure, is about the not-so-obviously-major question of whether or not one should type a d in "I didn't used to watch Youtube". (I'm not entirely confident: I neither created it nor have edited it, and am not sure how its ellipses are intended to be understood.)
That's a question about lexical use(d), not about auxiliary (and perhaps modal auxiliary) use(d) (using which, one would say "I used not to watch Youtube" or "I usedn't to watch Youtube"). But this article is about modal auxiliary verbs, not their lexical homonyms, and therefore I removed this footnote in the following edit. Maybe it belongs in some other article.
(In conversational English, I suspect that "I never used to watch Youtube" would be more likely than anything above, but I can't immediately produce evidence supporting this belief.) -- Hoary ( talk) 05:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Use /jus/ is these days a lexical verb, more often than not. But it used not only to be. It used to be an auxiliary verb too, usedn't it? (Yes, it used to.) And for some speakers, it still is.
Now, the question is of whether to treat it as a modal auxiliary verb, or as just a (non-modal) auxiliary verb. Two authorities that treat it as a modal:
Three that do not:
Wikipedia shouldn't pretend that there's agreement. But it also shouldn't treat use as a modal in this article and as a non-modal in the article English auxiliary verbs -- which is what it does now.
Plan: A week from now, if nobody objects, I'll:
How about it? -- Hoary ( talk) 12:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
On 28 December 2012, somebody added:
-- with no reference. Despite their later block, the writer seems to have been serious. But as there's little hope that they'll reappear and source this claim, I'm about to delete it. Anyone is free to readd it, but with a source. -- Hoary ( talk) 07:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
I've offered to help Hoary with converting the references in this article to use {{ sfn}} style short form refs, rather tha the current use of refnames and {{ rp}} trmplates. If no-one objects I'll start the work tomorrow. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested « @» ° ∆t° 12:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Amazing conversion job done! A tip of the hat to ActivelyDisinterested for this series of edits and a much improved look 'n' feel for the article. I fear that all of that would have taken me most of one day. Thank you, ActivelyDisinterested! -- Hoary ( talk) 04:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Somewhere in this set of edits Drmies added
(citing Di Paolo).
That (and much else) got scrambled 53 weeks later, by some IP who didn't know what they were doing. The result makes no sense to me. Like so much crap in Wikipedia, it lived on.
Here's what Di Paolo writes:
I'm about to revert to the Drmies version. -- Hoary ( talk) 11:32, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Here you'll find a bulky and lovingly crafted footnote that, I'm pretty sure, is about the not-so-obviously-major question of whether or not one should type a d in "I didn't used to watch Youtube". (I'm not entirely confident: I neither created it nor have edited it, and am not sure how its ellipses are intended to be understood.)
That's a question about lexical use(d), not about auxiliary (and perhaps modal auxiliary) use(d) (using which, one would say "I used not to watch Youtube" or "I usedn't to watch Youtube"). But this article is about modal auxiliary verbs, not their lexical homonyms, and therefore I removed this footnote in the following edit. Maybe it belongs in some other article.
(In conversational English, I suspect that "I never used to watch Youtube" would be more likely than anything above, but I can't immediately produce evidence supporting this belief.) -- Hoary ( talk) 05:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Use /jus/ is these days a lexical verb, more often than not. But it used not only to be. It used to be an auxiliary verb too, usedn't it? (Yes, it used to.) And for some speakers, it still is.
Now, the question is of whether to treat it as a modal auxiliary verb, or as just a (non-modal) auxiliary verb. Two authorities that treat it as a modal:
Three that do not:
Wikipedia shouldn't pretend that there's agreement. But it also shouldn't treat use as a modal in this article and as a non-modal in the article English auxiliary verbs -- which is what it does now.
Plan: A week from now, if nobody objects, I'll:
How about it? -- Hoary ( talk) 12:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
On 28 December 2012, somebody added:
-- with no reference. Despite their later block, the writer seems to have been serious. But as there's little hope that they'll reappear and source this claim, I'm about to delete it. Anyone is free to readd it, but with a source. -- Hoary ( talk) 07:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
I've offered to help Hoary with converting the references in this article to use {{ sfn}} style short form refs, rather tha the current use of refnames and {{ rp}} trmplates. If no-one objects I'll start the work tomorrow. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested « @» ° ∆t° 12:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Amazing conversion job done! A tip of the hat to ActivelyDisinterested for this series of edits and a much improved look 'n' feel for the article. I fear that all of that would have taken me most of one day. Thank you, ActivelyDisinterested! -- Hoary ( talk) 04:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)