I would just like to add to Johanna's history that even the change from
irregular to regular verbs has not been wholly consistent.  If I remember
right, freeze used to be a regular verb and became irregular and others
changed their irregularity!  As Johanna says, it's the speakers of the
language that do this--not English teachers, as we sometimes are accused!

> ----------
> From:         Johanna Rubba[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> Sent:         Wednesday, June 28, 2000 6:08 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      regularizing irregular verbs
>
> Dear Steve,
>
> I read your query that was posted to the ATEG grammar list and thought I
> would respond.
>
> English used to have many more irregular verbs than it now has. The
> trend in English over the last 1500 years has been for irregular verbs
> to become regular. The changes in 'dive' and 'plead' are an example of
> this phenomenon.
>
> Irregular forms tend to hang on best in verbs of basic meaning and high
> frequency. For this reason, common verbs like 'take', 'eat', etc. are
> likely to remain irregular for  centuries. However, verbs that are less
> frequently used, such as 'plead' and 'dive', and 'strive' (for another
> example), tend to regularize.
>
> This regularization happens in speech. There is a period during which
> both the older irregular forms and the new regularized forms are in use;
> the population will divide along those who find the old one better, the
> new one better, and those to whom both or neither sound right. This is
> normal. Changes in language take time to 'settle out'.
>
> Written language is under more-conscious control. It is subject to
> 'regulations' introduced by writers of manuals and stylebooks, as well
> as grammar and writing teachers. No one really has the right to forbid a
> word unless the larger community decides to accord that person such
> authority. Most attempts to prohibit or prevent language change are
> futile; the spoken form sooner or later worms its way into written
> usage; the more conservative authorities literally die off; eventually,
> the older forms are forgotten.
>
> The Times seems to be favoring regularization and consistency (not
> accepting both the irregular and regular forms). This is a bit unusual;
> language authorities usually insist on maintaining the older form out of
> some feeling that it's 'better' or 'more correct'. (Use of the newer
> form is often attributed to laziness or stupidity rather than the normal
> and natural phenomenon of language change.)
>
> Language, even written language, isn't shaped by policy decisions made
> by some 'official' committee somewhere. The large community of users of
> the language ultimately determines what will be considered correct.
> There is always an area of contention as the self-styled authorities
> attempt to impose what they feel is 'most correct', but they are
> swimming against the tide in most cases.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics
> English Department, California Polytechnic State University
> One Grand Avenue  * San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
> Tel. (805)-756-2184  *  Fax: (805)-756-6374 * Dept. Phone.  756-259
> * E-mail: [log in to unmask] *  Home page: http://www.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
>                                        **
> "Understanding is a lot like sex; it's got a practical purpose,
> but that's not why people do it normally"  -            Frank  Oppenheimer
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>