This question has been answered · 34 replies
I have a co-worker who constantly uses "went" instead of "gone". For example, "Have the payments went out for these vendor id's??". I know it is incorrect grammar, but I can't explain to her exactly why (it has been too long since I was in school). Can someone please give me the reasoning behind using gone instead of went in this instance?
Thanks in advance!
Approved answer (verified by Mister Micawber)
Went is simple past and has nothing to do with that context.
AnonymousHi all,After 'have' a past participle should be used. For example, 'I have eaten', 'I have not eaten', 'I have not done my work', 'They have gone to church", etc. Use common usages, which she is familiar with. I think this is the best way to convince her.
Therefore, in your example, 'Have ... gone ...'
I hope this helps.
Anonymous:"Have the payments went out for these vendor id's??".
Start with "Have", means present perfect is used. So, "have" in the question sentence must be near with the Past Participle (Verb 3) , NOT VERB 2 such as "went" she uses.
You may say, no one uses Verb2 in the Present Perfect sentence like you, everyone use Past Participle. But tell her "you can use that, no problem. But only in spoken not written"
Perhaps the better thing to do is model the correct grammar and say back "Yes, those invoices have gone out." If she ever asks YOU why you say it that way, then you can explain.
Anonymous:THat is wrong, YOu say Have you seen this before not Have you saw this before
This is some kind of a dialect in AmE these days. Of course, not educated speech. You can find that for the last 150 years or so, so it is native.
<>This is what Donna Richoux says about it in another forum:
I'm not sure why you think this is new. For example, a search at
Google Books for "have went" during 1850-1900 shows examples, including
grammar books cautioning against it:
The Institutes of English Grammar: Methodically Arranged, with Forms for
By Goold Brown
NOTE I. -- The preterit should not be employed to form the
compound tenses, nor should the perfect participle be used for
the preterit. Thus: say, "To have gone," -- not, "To have
went;" and, "I did it,"-- not, "I done it."
A Practical Grammar: In which Words, Phrases, and Sentences are
Classified .By Stephen Watkins Clark
45. " Had I known the character of the lecture, I would not have went."
Mark Twain discusses it, among other features of Northern and Southern
US English, in "Life on the Mississippi":
...The unpolished [Southerners] often use 'went' for 'gone.' It is
nearly as bad as the Northern 'hadn't ought.' This reminds me that a
remark of a very peculiar nature was made here in my neighborhood (in
the North) a few days ago: 'He hadn't ought to have went.' How is that?
Isn't that a good deal of a triumph? One knows the orders combined in
this half-breed's architecture without inquiring: one parent Northern,
the other Southern.
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux
AnonymousI have a co-worker who constantly uses "went" instead of "gone". For example, "Have the payments went out for these vendor id's??". I know it is incorrect grammar, but I can't explain to her exactly why (it has been too long since I was in school). Can someone please give me the reasoning behind using gone instead of went in this instance?It has probably been equally long since your co-worker was in school. Other posters have already given you the grammatical reasons, but I'm with GG on this one. There's no point in asking someone to change a life-long habit. They may find it very difficult to change even if they want to -- which is even less likely. If you do attempt to correct someone else's grammar, be prepared for failure, along with a long period of resentment. If you abandon your project (recommended), you can still enjoy the mistakes as examples of an interesting linguistic phenomenon.
Anonymous:I just wanted to support the post about it being a dialect, and I'll go even further. This is a characteristic dialect in American English, particularly in the midwest, where it is the norm for not only "uneducated" people, but for educated people as well. Now, according to prescriptivist grammar, yes, this is incorrect, but I'm a descriptivist myself, and have no problem accepting when people speak in their local dialects .
People are waiting to help.
Related forum topics: