Past Participle

[jack]

Are these correct?
1. A good result can be gotten at around 190 cd/m² of luminance. (How come I can use 'gotten' here? Isn't gotten for past participles?)
2. A good result can be got at around 190 cd/m² of luminance. (How come it doesn't sound right with 'got' ?)

Thanks

[Tdol]

As a British speaker, 'got' sounds fine to me- we don't use 'gotten'.

[Tdol]

Ooops! I nearly forgot- they are past participles here- it's a passive construction.

[jack]

Or is it becase 'gotten' is an irregular verb?

Like this:
1. This can be seen.
2. This can be saw. (If this incorrect, why? How come 'got' is correct for the post above?)

Thanks.

[HCaulfield]

It seems to me that gotten is the way to go. As tdol says, it is a passive construction.

[Casiopea]

Or is it becase 'gotten' is an irregular verb?

Like this:
1. This can be seen.
2. This can be saw. (If this incorrect, why? How come 'got' is correct for the post above?)

Thanks.

get, got, gotten
see, saw, seen

This can be gotten. . . (i.e., can be had, be gained)
This can be seen. . .

Note that, BE + Past Participle = Passive Voice. For example,

hit, hit, hit: The car was hit.

walk, walked, walked: The dog was walked. Should the dog be walked?

Sentence 2. is incorrect. 'saw' should be 'seen', and 'got' should be 'gotten'.