Forums · General English Grammar & Vocabulary, Listening & Speaking · General English Grammar Questions
Can anyone explain why my American Heritage Dictionary does not list the past participle separately, since it is irregular (to the extent that it has the same form as the base form, rather than being the same as the simple past)?
I would expect: run v. ran, run, running, runs.
They are only listing the past participle, they say, if it differs. They don't say differs from what, but I think the intention is to omit the past participle when it does not differ from the past.
So the entries for run and come are wrong.
come lists only came, coming, and comes. Not came, come, coming, comes.
I haven't consulted a complete table of irregular verbs, but I think these are the only two (plus any compounds like become) that there are with this pattern.
I think we ought to stage an Occupy Houghton Mifflin protest of some kind!
People are waiting to help.
Live chatRegistered users can join here
Related forum topics:
Participle?Past Participle?as if +had past participle?[is, am, are] + Past Participle?get + past participle?Past participle or Present participle?Will be + past participle??TO HAVE +PAST PARTICIPLE?Have + object + verb or to + be + past participle?Have + something + Past Participle?As + Past Participle?Why Past Participle is not past?Participle or not?To be + past participleParticiple tenses