Words are the building blocks of utterances, and most central to thoughts and propositions among words are verbs. Verbs embody the crux of expressions, so a wrong choice of verb can make a sentence convey a different meaning from what the writer intends to communicate.
Deciding whether or not to use the regular or irregular forms of verbs in sentences is dependent on certain grammatical and sociolinguistic parameters. Regular verbs derive their past and past participle forms from the addition of -d or -ed to the verbs. Examples are walk, drop, climb, decide, call, etc. Irregular verbs do not derive their past and past participle forms from the addition of ‐d or -ed. Some examples of irregular verbs are feel, go, drive, drink, eat, fall, etc. This piece will discuss some of the factors determining the choice of regular or irregular verbs in sentence constructions.
First of all, the choice of regular or irregular verbs could be determined by the preferred variety of English. While British English uses some irregular verbs, Americans subscribe to the regular forms of such verbs, as the examples below show:
The young man has knelt down for hours (British English).
The young man has kneeled down for hours (American English).
Jessica spoilt the toys last night (British English).
Jessica spoiled the toys last night (American English).
It must be mentioned that some participial forms function as adjectives and, notwithstanding the variety of the past participle, such occur in the regular forms. An example is ‘learned’ as an adjective. While British English can use the irregular form ‘learnt’ and American English uses ‘learned’ as the past tense and past participle of ‘learn,’ ‘learned’ cannot be replaced with ‘learnt’ when the former means an educated person.
I have learnt something new (British English).
I have learned something new (American English).
He is a learnt person (non-standard).
He is a learned person (adjective; standard).
I must add that ‘learned,’ as the past tense and past participle of ‘learn,’ is pronounced /lɜːnd/ while ‘learned,’ as a participial adjective, is vocalised as /ˈlɜːnɪd/.
This distinction should be clearly maintained in articulation.
Again, the choice of verb can also be dependent on the layers of meaning for some words. While the past tense and past participle of ‘find’ (to discover) is ‘found’, the past tense and past participle of ‘found’ (to establish) is ‘founded’. These usages are shown below.
They have not found the right candidate for the post (to discover; standard).
They had not found the organisation when I moved to the UK (non-standard).
They had not founded the organisation when I moved to the UK (to establish; standard).
Founded is also used as an adjective when one means that something is based on another:
The criticisms were not founded on facts (standard).
His successes were founded on determination and perseverance (standard).
Similarly, the past tense of the verb ‘grind’ (to crush; make into small pieces) is ‘ground’ while the past tense of ‘ground’ (to disallow a young person or child from going out as a punishment) is ‘grounded’. The examples below demonstrate these usages:
He wants to ground pepper (non-standard).
He wants to grind pepper (to crush; standard).
I have grounded the pepper (non-standard).
I have ground the pepper (standard).
Her parents have ground her for three days (non-standard).
Her parents have grounded her for three days (to disallow her from going out; standard).
What is more, the past tense and the past participle of ‘fall’ is ‘fell’ and ‘fallen’ respectively, whereas the past tense and past participle of ‘fell’ (to cut down or to knock someone down) is ‘felled’ thus:
The items fell from that cupboard (standard).
The items have fell from that cupboard (non-standard).
The items have fallen from that cupboard (standard).
The lumberjack fell three trees yesterday (non-standard).
The lumberjack felled three trees yesterday (standard).
Manny Pacquiao has fallen his opponent with one punch (non-standard).
Manny Pacquiao has felled his opponent with one punch (standard).
Read also: Round up or round off: Demystifying phrasal verbs in English
Finally, there are some verbs that change their past and past participle forms based on the meaning intended by the speaker. An example of such a verb is ‘hang’. When the word means to suspend or be suspended from above, with the lower part dangling, the past tense and past participle of the verb is ‘hung’, while the past tense and past participle is ‘hanged’ when it means to kill.
A white shirt was hanged on the clothes line (non-standard).
A white shirt was hung on the clothes line (standard).
The assassin was hung to death (non-standard).
The assassin was hanged to death (standard).
Similarly, we have:
This SUV costed me thirty million naira (non-standard).
This SUV cost me thirty million naira (standard).
The project has been cost by Mr. Philips (non-standard).
The project has been costed by Mr. Philips (standard).
Therefore, the past tense and past participle of ‘cost’ (needing the payment of an amount before something can be owned or undertaken) is ‘cost’, whereas when ‘cost’ means to estimate the worth of something, its past tense and past participial form is ‘costed’.
This piece has shown the dynamics that characterise the use of regular and irregular verbs. Hence, users of the language should endeavour to choose their verb forms carefully during speech and writing.
