Thursday, April 14, 2016

Backes, once again, you missed the point, you dumb pluck. 

You can use "proven," or you can say "proved." And in my case, I used "proven" in one instance and "proved" in another. And it's perfectly OK. People may have a preference for one or the other, but there is no hard and fast rule about it, and you can go with whichever sounds better to you at the time.  

Proved vs. proven

Proven is usually an adjective (e.g., a proven formula), and proved is usually the inflected form of the verb prove (e.g., I proved it; I have proved it). This is not a rule, though, and exceptions abound, especially in American English, where proven is often used as a participial inflection of the verb. For example, where a British writer is likely to write I have proved you wrong, an American writer might write I have proven you wrong.
Both forms are many centuries old. Proven appears in the 15th-century works of Chaucer, for instance. But proved has always been the prevalent inflection ever since prove emerged from its pre-Middle English roots, and only over the last century or so has proven gained significant ground. This doesn’t mean proven is wrong, though. It is a very well-established form, and only a few people from outside North America consider it questionable. 

If either is OK, then both can be used in the same piece of writing. 

It's not that you didn't accurately quote me; it's that you inaccurately faulted me. You criticized me for nothing. 

I quoted a statement which said "one can use either." In response to that, Backes wrote this:

"He thinks I've used the word "proven," or "proved" when according to him I should have used one and not the other.".

No, Backes. I said that either is OK. But, plain English is too difficult for you to understand because you're an idiot. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.