• BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    172
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Fun fact, costed is a word but has a slightly different meaning than the way you have used it.

    Costed means to get the details on the cost of something complex. Like “I costed the three projects and the last one is cheapest”

    You tried to use it as the past tense of cost, but the past tense of cost is also just cost.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        I am Canadian, and I was taught Cost as past tense in school and university. I’ve never seen it written Costed for past tense in any government publication either.

    • Sabata@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      I like OPs version better and chose to evolve the language that way.

      • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        If only a very small handful of people make the same mistake, it doesn’t evolve the language, it’s just a mistake, plain and simple.

        I know you’re just trying to make yourself feel a wee bit morally superior by saying that, but it’s the complete opposite of how language evolution works

          • Default_Defect@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            People have varying degrees of ability to understand outside of what they know, what is “good enough” for you might be incomprehensible to someone else.

      • addie@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah; as a native and fairly well-educated speaker, I’m fucked if I can form the past participles of some of our verbs

        If I swim across a river, is it now the swimmed river? Swum river? Swam river?

        If I sneak into a room, have I sneaked? Snuck? Both sound wrong.

        Didn’t find anything ambiguous about ‘costed’, it works for me.

        • Censored@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          If you swim across a river, it is now a river you’ve swum. If you sneak into a room, you have snuck in.

          Those are correct but they look and sound wrong.

        • palordrolap@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Would some variant of “snauk(t)” or “snaught” work for you? Your brain might be expecting ablaut in the style of “teach” / “taught” or “catch” / “caught” rather than that of “sing” / “sung”.

          How do you feel about “(p)reached”? “Snaked”?

          A fun fact about “caught” is that it’s a relative neologism. It uh, caught on after people decided they didn’t like “catched” for whatever reason. (I guess it has something to do with tangibility / concreteness. Most other -atch words are used for objects.)

      • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I prefer cost, not sure why but it just feels more natural and easier for me to say. But I am not a native speaker if it means anything.