3 ms·

Off topic: why isn’t it “didn’t use”?

• ketralnis 4y ago
  They're both fairly common https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=%22used%20to%22,%22use%20to%22 https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=%...
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • tjader 4y ago
    "used to" alone is correct in many situations, "didn't used to" is considered wrong by prescriptivists. Including the "didn't" in the search shows that it's still close though: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=didn%27t%20used%20to,didn%27t%20use%20to https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=d...
• js2 4y ago
  It is. "Didn't /used to/" is a mistake in American English, according to prescriptivists anyway: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/is-it-used-to-or-use-to https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/is-it-used-to-...
  • wyattpeak 4y ago
    EDIT: Never mind, sorry, I missed part of the article, it does indeed say what you say. --- That's the opposite of what your source says: > In writing, however, use to in place of used to is an error. Used to X was the standard past tense of to use in the sense of being in the habit of: I used to fish: I was previously in the habit of fishing, correct both in the past and today. I use to fish: I am presently in the habit of fishing, correct in the past but no longer understood today. The second, however, is according to MW occasionally misused to mean "I was previously in the habit of fishing".
    • as_bntd 4y ago
      There's a difference when use is preceded by did: > The problem becomes a little trickier in constructions with did. The form considered correct following did, at least in American English, is use to. Just as we say "Did he want to?" instead of "Did he wanted to?," so we say "Did he use to?" instead of "Did he used to?" Here again, only in writing does the difference become an issue. > While in American English "did used to" is considered an error... Personally, didn't used to looks jarring, but it made me open the article so…
      • wyattpeak 4y ago
        Oh, excuse me, I entirely missed that section of the page. Makes sense there's a geographical distinction, I'm not American so I suppose I don't have the intuitive issue with it, but on reading I see the logic.
  • swatcoder 4y ago
    Garner’s Modern English Usage (4th edition) acknowledges didn’t used to as “fully accepted” (Stage 5) and notes that it was almost twice as common in journalistic usage. There’s long been open debate among linguists about what might be formally more correct, but with sound arguments on both sides. It mostly comes down to grammatical rule vs idiomatic phrase with a strong validating history. That said, he suggests never used to as a way to escape the grammar debate while still keeping used.
    • eCa 4y ago
      But does ”never used to” really mean the same as ”didn’t use to”? ”Unix never used to support shebang” almost makes it seem like it just happened.
      • johnday 4y ago
        Yeah, it's different: "Didn't use(d) to [...]" means that there was a time where it did not [...]; whereas "Never used to" means that at every previous time it did not [...].
• lttlrck 4y ago
  Either seem awkward to me, esp. when written, I'd prefer "didn't always support".
• decremental 4y ago
  Classic HN. One comment about the article. Nine comments about the title.
  • user3939382 4y ago
    Or nine comments about the scrollbar behavior or design of the content.