zompist bboard

For me have to is /ˈ(h)æftu/ [ˈ(h)ɛftʲʉ̯u(ː)]~/ˈ(h)æftə/ [ˈ(h)ɛftə(ː)], which contrasts with have two /ˈ(h)ævˈtu/ [ˈ(h)ɛːfˈtʲʰʉ̯u(ː)].

Had to does not have anything special going on with it, being /ˈ(h)ædtu/ [ˈ(h)ɛːtʲːʉ̯u(ː)]~/ˈ(h)ædtə/ [ˈ(h)ɛːtːə(ː)]. This contrasts with had two /ˈ(h)ædˈtu/ [ˈ(h)ɛːtʲˈtʲʰʉ̯u(ː)] only because of the stress difference and its effect on aspiration. Note that /dt/ is distinguished from /tt/ by a lack of preglottalization and a long preceding vowel.

_________________
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.

What's "bikeshed"?

"discuss", I suppose.

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

A West Virginian senator on CNN keeps saying "I take it serious" instead of using the adverb "seriously." Is this characteristic of Appalachian English?

He also just said "the goodest country in the world."

It's interesting listening to this guy.

_________________
and

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”

It's also (afaict) becoming commonplace in England; I've noticed it in the speech of my younger brother and his friends.

Adjective/adverb replacement is common in my own speech. I often catch myself saying 'good' for 'well' or 'bad' for 'badly.' But I don't think I've ever extended it to other adjectives such as 'serious.' Is there a limit to the replacement? Can it be done for long adverbs? For example, "He did it different than you'd think".*

*Ok, now I am really unsure that this is truly marked for me. While this sentence appears marked to me, I'd likely say "He made it separate from the others" where 'separate' replaces 'separately.'

_________________
and

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Did Old English take the adverb ending -līce from Old Norse? And now Modern English is dropping this Old Norse innovation?

_________________
and

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Nah, I think it just happened to be a development that was similar to Old Norse (although I'm no expert on the history of English).

As for why people would merge adverbs and adjectives, well, IIRC it's cross-linguistically more unusual for a language to have adverbs than to have adjectives (and more unusual to have those than just nouns and verbs).

_________________
and

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

An English adverb that is identical in form to an adjective, rather than an adjective + the "ly" suffix, can be called a "flat" adverb. As others have mentioned, flat adverbs are common in speech, especially colloquial speech, in many areas and my understanding is that they've had some use continuously since before adverbs and adjectives were differentiated, so the existence of adverbs with this form is not exactly innovative. Some uses for some words are considered standard.

I don't know of any native-spoken variety of English where "ly" adverbs seem to be on a clear path to disappearing entirely. I don't think I've ever heard "it's entire different" for "it's entirely different," for example. I can't think of the exact conditions right now, but I think there's something like adverbs modifying predicative adjectives are unlikely to be able to be flat, while adverbs modifying verbs/verb phrases are more likely to be able to be flat. Certainly it depends in part on the specific word; "real" is usable as an adverb in any position ("it's real good" is certainly possible and common colloquially).

Hmm, yeah, I guess "real" is actually pretty much restricted to modifying adjectives, like "very".

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.