Para quem realmente quer arguir essa questão, tente desvendar tudo que este "Brit" está dizendo sobre o assunto, prestando bastante atenção às ultimas observações dele sobre ritmo, etc. (que era o que eu estava dizendo):
"John Ramsay Original usenet post 637952 Thu, 25 May 06 01:28 PM
"The Brits do indeed have a problem with 'gotten'. Shakespeare ... quibbles about 'got/gotten' can only be classified as misbegotten -:)"
"Well, Americans went one way on "gotten," the British went another. I've spent six years here in Greece surrounded by ... best science graduates with delusions of grandeur, and at worst low trash, but misbegotten? No, I wouldn't go that far."
We're getting close to agreement here. We both dislike pretentiousness in correcting the language of others.
(I am particularly amused by Brits who assume because I no longer have an upper crust accent that I'm open game for their pretentiousness. I am a former Brit, with a father who did a stint an an ESL teacher. Fowler and Fowlers' 'The King's English' replaced daily bible readings in my Brit childhood.)
You seem to have missed my point that Brit pretenders lay claim to the language of Shakespeare for usage support, yet often do not know Shakespeare's usage. An interesting self-contradiction.
You also missed the fact that there was an -:) after 'misbegotten'.
I have often used 'illgotten' and 'misbegotten' to illustrate to carpers that 'gotten' is a viable form.
"At the same time, Americans have our Flipper Mikes to remind us just how far down the bottom of the ... could you? How does it work for you kids up there? Got any books on Canadian usage on your shelf?"
Yeah, I got stuff on my shelf. Wot self-respectin English teach don't?
Canadians tread a middle ground between US/Brit usage.
The Houghton Mifflin Dictionary of Canadian English (based on The American Heritage Dictionary) was begun in 1969.
My 1982 version simply lists 'got' as PT & PP of 'get'. And 'gotten' as PP of 'get'. Without further comment.
This, despite the fact that above dictionary had a very impressive editorial board, including HL Smith, Prof of Linguistics at UB. All ready willing & able to make judgements on usage -:)
(HL Smith a figure known or unknown to you in your undergrad days in upstate NY?)
The Oxford Dictionary of Canadian English, disk version, lists 'got' as PT & PP and '"gotten" as N.Amer. usage of PP.'
Not new if you consider Fowler's 1957 'Dictionary of American-English Usage' treatment of 'got/gotten.'
Still on my shelf from undergrad days.
Best advice is McGraw-Hill 'Handbook of English':
'Both "have got" and "have gotten" are acceptable terms. Your choice will depend upon your speech habits or on the rhythm of the sentence you are speaking or
Betcha even the most pretentiously fastidious Brit would not say, 'I've got tired of you.'
From http://www.englishforums.com/English/Go ... htm#637952