Just as an aside, I find hilarious to read a sample of dialog in which
the writer attempt to use 'got' or 'gotten' and falls flat; e.g., I've got 
to go = I must go; I've gotten to go = I had the opportunity to go and I
went.  Almost always, the writer uses 'gotten' where only 'got' would fit.
Note that 'I got to go' in a past scenario carries the same meaning of
'I've gotten to go.'  Colloquially, one may hear 'Well, I got to go' in 
the sense of 'I've got to go.' 

Scott Catledge
Professor Emeritus

Well, I know I'm going to be remarkably sorry about this.

The use of 'had' or 'have' as auxiliaries always forces the past
participle.  That's how English works.  "got" and 'gotten' are simply
alternate forms of the past participle of 'get.'  It's just easier to
tell that 'gotten' is the past participle because it is irregular, so it
doesn't look like the preterite. The fact that the preterite and the
past participle look identical in regular English verbs doesn't mean
they are the same.  This becomes clear when using verbs with irregular
past participles.  While we're on the subject, past participles aren't
past, just as present participles aren't present.  They have no time;
they are nonfinite.  The fact that they are badly named causes no end of
confusion.

=20

Janet

********************************

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/