Home » Discussion Forum

Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

Discussion Forum (Archived)

Please consider registering
Guest
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Min search length: 3 characters / Max search length: 84 characters
The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
sp_TopicIcon
"ought" ought to be followed by "to". But "ought not" ought or ought not?
Guest
1
2009/06/01 - 6:24pm

I was reading some vintage Orwell and I came across " ... oughtn't to say ... .". This sounded reasonably archaic or foreign to me. Then I realized that my ideolect dictates that "ought not" ought not be followed by "to." Even I recognize that it's odd. Still, there is no question about it that two distinct rules are at play.

Looking up usage, it appears to vary regionally in the US. I can't recall ever hearing "ought not to" or "oughtn't to" anywhere in my US travels.

So, where are you from? And what do you hear and say?

Guest
2
2009/06/01 - 10:59pm

Where I'm from (northern California), I usually heard ought not. My grandmother, from Massachusetts, would say ought not to or oughtn't to. But everyone knows that Easterners talk funny.

Guest
3
2009/06/02 - 7:52am

Thanks for the data points.

I had a great aunt who used to say durst and durstn't (/dersint/) but I haven't heard those in decades.

Guest
4
2009/06/04 - 1:53pm

My grandmother (also from Massachusetts) used to say "oughtn' not", usually talking about something I have done already, but should not have.

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles
Show Stats
Administrators:
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Moderators:
Grant Barrett
Top Posters:
Newest Members:
Eileen Kosnik
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 1
Topics: 3647
Posts: 18912

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 618
Members: 1267
Moderators: 1
Admins: 2
Most Users Ever Online: 1147
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 26
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Recent posts