[Grammar] Where did you use to go when you were a kid?

[abaka]

Isn't the pronunciation of "used to" as [ju:sttə] or [ju:stə] a simple devoicing assimilation? Must it carry meaning?

 

[Phaedrus]

How does the pronunciation of the 's' as /s/ support the idiomatic phrase didn't used to? Is Garner suggesting that if the word were actually the lexical verb use, it would be pronounced with a /z/?

Have I got that right? If so, that doesn't seem to follow.

I was typing that quotation in a hurry and made a typo in the part to which you're referring, jutfrank. I had typed: "But in fact, we can draw an inference from pronunciation of the -s- in use (/yooz/) and(/yoost/), and it supports the idiomatic phrase didn't used to." I should have typed: "But in fact, we can draw an inference from pronunciation of the -s- in use (/yooz/) and used (/yoost/), and it supports the idiomatic phrase didn't used to." (I have edited my post accordingly.) Garner's point is that the spelling "didn't used to" tells us that the pronunciation is /yoost/, whereas the pronunciation is unclear in didn't use to. As Piscean has observed, however, in Post #9 (a reply to my Post #8), context generally makes it clear which meaning is intended. Thus, although beachboy's third example ("What did you use to eat when you were young?") is syntactically ambiguous, presumably it would be uttered or written in a context in which the hearer/reader would grasp whether the speaker was inquiring about instrument ("I used chopsticks to eat when I was young" --> /yooz/) or past eating habits ("I used to eat fish and rice when I was young" --> /yoost/). Nevertheless, Garner's recommendation renders such contextual divination unnecessary: we know from spelling alone that used in a sentence like "What did you used to eat when you were young?" must be pronounced /yoost/, because the spelling makes it clear that the quasi/semi modal used to is being used.

 

[abaka]

Garner's point is that the spelling "didn't used to" tells us that the pronunciation is /yoost/, whereas the pronunciation is unclear in didn't use to.

I fail to understand why this should be so. If anything, the spelling "didn't used to" might suggest a [z] because of the presence of a voiced [d], whereas in "didn't use to", the ought to assimilate with the [t].

 

[abaka]

Piscean, I think the way you draw this distinction for "used to" might be a recent feature of British English.

Daniel Jones notes it precisely the opposite way in his Outline of English Phonetics (1927).

297. s is the normal sound of the letter s, as in sou [* sǝʊ in modern transcription -- abaka]. S is always pronounced s at the beginning of words, but in other positions it is very frequently pronounced z. Compare [...] use (subst.) ju:s, use (v.) ju:z, used (in the sense "was accustomed") ju:st, used ("made use of") ju:zd;....
​

 

[Rover_KE]

I fear that this thread is on the verge of moderator-excommunication ...

I doubt it. The mods here are generally pretty tolerant if the original question (Are questions using "used to" common? in this thread) has been dealt with and the ensuing diversion is not too far off topic.

Well put. I have been known to relocate (hardly 'excommunicate') such threads to General Language Discussions when the OP has long since lost interest and the replies have gone well over the heads of our client ESL punters, but in this case beachboy is still reading and liking every post.

We appreciate how fortunate we are at present to have attracted to this one place on the internet so many erudite, knowledgable grammarians thoughtfully and civilly debating the finer points of the language. I don't know where else they could do this, and long may it continue.

 

[beachboy]

Well put. I have been known to relocate (hardly 'excommunicate') such threads to General Language Discussions when the OP has long since lost interest and the replies have gone well over the heads of our client ESL punters, but in this case beachboy is still reading and liking every post.

Liking every post was the least I could do! I feel honored with so much attention from all of you.

 

[jutfrank]

I find the top answer here interesting.

I think the speculation is that the verb in used to is not actually the common verb use (ju:z), but use (ju:s), being a verbalisation of the noun, and semantically distinct from the common verb.

Odd though this may be, it makes a good deal of sense to me, and certainly explains the pronunciation difference.

 

[abaka]

Has Jones anything to say about why/how the verb in the was accustomed sense and the noun have a /s/ sound but the verb in the make use of sense has a /z/?

Unfortunately he has not. He made a big point of collecting data and leaving it to others to make theories. ;-)

But the idea that the "accustomed to" sense re-purposes the noun "use" [ju:s] makes great sense to me.

 

[Phaedrus]

I think the speculation is that the verb in used to is not actually the common verb use (ju:z), but use (ju:s), being a verbalisation of the noun, and semantically distinct from the common verb.

Odd though this may be, it makes a good deal of sense to me, and certainly explains the pronunciation difference.

That is interesting, jutfrank. I especially like the Shakespeare quote, which appears to be from The Two Gentlemen of Verona (here) rather than from Twelfth Night: "How use doth breed a habit in man!" It personifies use (the referent of the noun), stating that it does something to people: it breeds habits in them.

If acquiring a habit is, metaphorically, to be used by use (in its archaic sense) to do the thing that becomes a habit, or to be in a manner that becomes a habitual state, it's as if there may be a concealed, historically passive meaning in used to. Consider this interesting gem I came across in Jane Austen a couple of years ago:

"'I did not think you had been so obstinate, Catherine,' said James; 'you were not used to be so hard to persuade; you once were the kindest, best-tempered of my sisters.'"

- Jane Austen, Northanger Abbey

I wonder how many other examples there are of this usage. "Were" takes the place of "did": "you did not use(d) to be so hard to persuade." It's hard to tell whether "were" is the passive auxiliary (in which case "used" is a past participle) or whether "were" is a copula (in which case "used" is an adjective). I'd like to think it's passive.