OCR Text |
Show "HAS GOT." , We have received from a valued reader the following criticism 0 the Chronicle's grammar: "Will you kindly Justify the use of "has got" as grammatical? I ask you the question In good faith, as I have noticed not a few times recently that you have UF-d thse words In your editorial col-uiiinr col-uiiinr lii the same manner In which they are used in the editorial Inclosed. I have nlv.ays coimldpred the Chronicle an idesl newspaper in every respect and Its grammar gram-mar absolutely correct. It is for these reasons that I a.k the question. -Q. C. T." Wo blahly spprove of the Intelligent public extrclslns; a sort of censorship over 'nevsptper grsmmar and rhetoric. The cnivtplaintfe are hot as numerous ss they should be. for "newspaper English" has now become something of a reproach. We do in t even claim that we ourselves are pet feet In this reepeot. but the criticism of Mr. Tucker is stranprely Inconsiderate. If he had taken the trouble to look Into a Final, dictionary he would have seen at a glance that "has got" Is good grsmmar. WrhMer. Worcester, Murray and the Stumlar.i and Century dictionaries all give "got" as the preferable passive participle par-ticiple of "get." with "gotten" as an allowable al-lowable form. Webster and Worcester Blve "gotten'- as obsolescent, snd Murray says; "In England the form 'gotten' of the past .participle Is almost obsolete, be-Inj-T superseded by 'got.' In the i'nited Stales literature "gotten" Is still very common, com-mon, although Webster gives it as obsolescent." obso-lescent." The sentence In which we used the words objected to was this: "The Japanese Japa-nese war has held the mirror up to Russia's Rus-sia's face until she has got a look at herself her-self that she can never forget." Perhaps the Chronicle's correspondent means that "has got." though grammatical, is inelegant, inele-gant, arrt that we should have said "has hud." or something of that kind. If so, we can only say that such a junction Is a mutter of taste, about whi?r; there can be no dispute. Chicago Chronicle. |