Got into a discussion on a mailing list today re English language differences, particularly re 'gotten'. I maintained that it's not used in Britain but a couple of Brits chimed in to say that they use it.
All I can say is that according to the OED, the past participle of 'get' in British English is 'got', whereas in US English it's 'gotten'. And if it's good enough for the OED, it's good enough for me ::g::
Oh, and Websters refers to gotten as being 'obsolete' in Britain.
In my defence I cited the Harry Potter books, pointing out that you won't find a single 'gotten' in them, as they're written by a British writer and set in Britain. And indeed you won't, unless of course you're reading the Americanised version.
Snerk.
In 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone' (and why the US publishers felt the need to change the perfectly serviceable 'Philosopher's Stone' is beyond me) sure enough there are 'gottens' galore.
I found an online extract and spent some anally retentive minutes looking for differences between the original and bowdlerised, um, Americanised, version. Besides the transmutation of 'got' into 'gotten', I noted the following:
bobble hats: bonnets (which conjures up a rather hilarious image in my head)
roundabout: carousel
cooker: stove
motorbike: motorcycle
Sellotape: Scotch tape
Mummy: Mommy (spit! Really can't see any need whatsoever for this change)
cine camera: video camera ('cos there's such a huge difference between them...)
video recorder became (of course) VCR
hamburger bars: hamburger restaurants (Why? Can't believe even the most insular American child couldn't have worked that one out)
cinema: 'the movies'
holiday: vacation
fringe: bangs
Now all of these alterations were in just a couple of pages. the sheer amount of effort that must have gone into changing the whole book is mind boggling. Why? What was the point?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
