# Past tense of forego/forgo



## newzamt

According to the dictionary, I should say forwent, but I'm convinced forgoed would be more typical in conversation (at least where I live). Am I alone on this, or are there other English speakers who use forgoed?

Thanks.


----------



## winklepicker

newzamt said:


> According to the dictionary, I should say forwent, but I'm convinced forgoed would be more typical in conversation (at least where I live). Am I alone on this, or are there other English speakers who use forgoed?


I hope there aren't any! Sorry! It's _forwent_. I think you're alone.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

To me it is a foregone conclusion that "forgoed" sounds just as strange and wrong as a past tense for "forgo" as "goed" sounds as a past tense for "go".

No one would say "_I goed to the store_", for example.

Since we have no problem finding go/went/gone to be natural, there should be little difficulty in thinking that forgo/forwent/forgone sound just as natural.


----------



## panjandrum

Oh dear me.
First of all, there are two different verbs involved here.
Forgo - to do without
Forego - to go before

Referring to a conclusion, it is almost certainly a foregone conclusion, not forgone.  It is a conclusion that was already determined, not a conclusion that we could do without.

Now, to the tricky question of the past tenses of these words?

Personally, I would work very, very hard to avoid writing either forwent or forewent.
I'm not saying either of these is wrong, but I am saying that they are odd, eccentric, alien words.

If I read either, I would have to stop to wonder why.  That is A Bad Thing.  Any usage that forces me to stop and wonder why has ceased to be a means of communication.


----------



## gaer

panjandrum said:


> Personally, I would work very, very hard to avoid writing either forwent or forewent.
> I'm not saying either of these is wrong, but I am saying that they are odd, eccentric, alien words.
> 
> If I read either, I would have to stop to wonder why. That is A Bad Thing. Any usage that forces me to stop and wonder why has ceased to be a means of communication.


I agree, and here some food for thought:

Results 1 - 10 of about 640 for "I forewent". 
Results 1 - 10 of about 559 for "I forwent". 

If you take a quick look, you will find that these two forms are confused! 

Gaer


----------



## tvdinner

I live in the western United States, and I have heard "forgoed" in conversation more than once.  It might not be correct according to prescriptionists, but descriptivists would certainly agree that it is an accepted word in this region.

I'm sympathetic with the "you don't say goed" argument, but English is full of idiosyncracies.  I would never write "forgoed," but when speaking you can probably get away with it in the right speech community.  Know your listener: that's the key.  I, for one, would never use it when chatting up an avid WordReference user.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

I am having a hard time coming up with a natural, conversational sentence in which the past tense of "forgo" would appear. The best alternative I can think of is "had to forgo", which is the past tense of _have_ plus the infinitive. "Forwent" might be uncommon, but "forgoed" would be no more common, and it certainly would sound a lot sillier.


----------



## tvdinner

<< deleted>>. But you're from New York, right?  You wouldn't use it in your speech community, but I do hear it from time to time out here in the uncivilized west.

Whether it's correct or not is irrelevant.  It's used, and the record should reflect that.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

tvdinner said:


> <<deleted>> But you're from New York, right? You wouldn't use it in your speech community, but I do hear it from time to time out here in the uncivilized west.


<<response to deleted comment>> Secondly, I didn't say the West was uncivilized, now, did I? What I did say, though, was "I_ am having a hard time coming up with a natural, conversational sentence in which the past tense of "forgo" would appear_." 



> Whether it's correct or not is irrelevant.


I would disagree, as it is the blatant incorrectness of "forgoed" that makes it seem silly to me.



> It's used, and the record should reflect that.


Since you say it is used, perhaps you could give us some examples of the natural, conversational sentences you hear in which a past tense of "forgo" would normally appear.


----------



## tvdinner

<< deleted by moderator >>

Your example:  last night a party guest said, "So I forgoed that promotion in order to do blah blah."  His use of the word was fishy enough to drive me here to unearth this ancient thread, and while I've managed thus far in my life not to use it, I reserve the right to as a Westerner in Good Standing.  

GreenWhite, you are clearly a prescriptivist.  That is your right, but I don't share your perspective.  I am a lot more interested in _how _people speak rather than how people _should _speak.  What's incorrect in one generation is accepted useage in the next, and what's common in one region is abhored in another.  It is precisely the types of shifts we're documenting right now that keep languages from ossifying and becoming irrelevant.  English's flexibility, the absence of a governing body like the _Real Academia_ in Spanish, and the contributions non-native speakers make all have a great deal to do with its global dominance.

We speak an ideosyncratic, living language, and I, for one, love every single one of its quirks.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

tvdinner said:


> Your example: last night a party guest said, "So I forgoed that promotion in order to do blah blah." His use of the word was fishy enough to drive me here to unearth this ancient thread,


So you yourself admit that you considered the use of "forgoed" to be "fishy"; I don't see how that it all that different from (or less "prescriptive" than) my description of the word as "silly".


----------



## johndot

You say, *tvdinner*, that you were “driven here to unearth this ancient thread” by a usage of ‘forgo’ (forgoed) that was “fishy”. But isn’t your apparent wish to find authentification for it, here, rather at variance with your views of Academies?


----------



## iskndarbey

I'm virtually certain that the perhaps one or two times in my life I have heard the past tense of 'forgo' in conversation the speaker said 'forgoed'. I would never say either 'forgoed' or 'forwent' for love or money. (Well, maybe if you make me a good enough offer...)

There are a few verbs in English that just don't have a past tense form that sounds correct enough to induce anybody to use it, such as 'awaken'. I think the best advice for 'forgo' is to treat it this way and just avoid the simple past.


----------



## Forero

The first time I (almost) used _for_(_e_)_go_ in past tense, I started to say "forgoed" and it just didn't sound right. I did not remember ever hearing _forwent_ before, but I had heard of a "foregone conclusion".

I have since seen several other people go through this same experience, invariably trying "forgoed" first, and usually rejecting it.

Since I had had occasion to use such a thing, I decided it must be a real word, though not one we use every day. I tried out both (spoken) forms on my friends and relatives.  A sentence with "forgoed" usually prompted a "that's ugly" facial expression and always got a verbal response like "Forgoed? ... Well, I know what you mean."

But with "forwent" the responses were more along the lines of "What? ... Oh." Some people even reacted to what I was saying and not to the way I said it.

The first time I tried to write "forgoed", it occurred to me that it really does not look like an English word, with or without the other _e_. "Forwent" at least looks respectable.

Oddly, the last thing I did was to check a dictionary, and only "forwent" was listed.

The next time I needed the word it was for a context like:

_Would it bother you terribly if we forwent the trip to the zoo today?_

It actually sounded right! And with "forgoed" it doesn't.

Does it?

From time to time, I hear a "forgoed" or a "forwent", and I still see others reacting the same way as before.


----------



## earcatching

I'm here because "forwent" sounded wrong to me. As a UK (Northern Irish) English speaker, I would definitely say "forgoed" if anything, although I agree that neither option sounds great.

It doesn't seem strange to me that a verb might become regular when its original derivation is far from obvious -- "forgo" doesn't seem to have much to do with "go" in its modern usage, and (in my head at least) it's as related as "avatar" is to "tar" (i.e., not at all).

There aren't a huge number of words that have lost an association with an irregular root verb. Most of them have preserved the irregularity, but there are exceptions:

got -- gotten(US)/got(UK), but forgot--forgotten (UK _and_ US), NOT he has *forgot, even in the UK.
prove--proved/proven, but approve--approved NOT *approven
welcome, welcomed, NOT *welcame

I might have some dodgy etymology in there, but if even one of them is a valid example, it strengthens the case for "forgoed" being included as a option, or at least a regional variation.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Forero said:


> The next time I needed the word it was for a context like:
> 
> _Would it bother you terribly if we forwent the trip to the zoo today?_
> 
> It actually sounded right! And with "forgoed" it doesn't.



It might go against the grain but I think I would use _forgoed_ here, were I to be confronted with such a sentence. I'm sure I have heard it more than a few times over here and can't say I really see anything wrong with it.


----------



## Loob

I'm pretty sure that 
(1) I only use _forgo_ in the infinitive (with or without 'to')
(2) I only use _forego_ in the shape of the past participle _foregone_.

This neatly allows me to sidestep difficult conjugation decisions.


----------



## pickarooney

I think we should all say 'skip' and be done with it. 

For the record 'forgoed' just sounds weird and 'foregoed' even worse to me.


----------



## ewie

What's that term for a verb which exists only in certain parts? (like _it's raining they're raining_)

The next time I hear someone actually *say* _for(e)went_ (or _for(e)goed_), I'll come back and report it here.  You may be in for a long wait.

*In speech: *_forgo_ = do without; _forego_ = go before, precede.

I seem to be having trouble forming a coherent thought ...


----------



## Thomas Tompion

It's called a _defective_ verb in my part of Lancashire, Mr E.

The words are coming thick and fast; they're raining down on you.


----------



## Loob

Thomas Tompion said:


> It's called a _defective_ verb in my part of Lancashire, Mr E.
> 
> The words are coming thick and fast; they're raining down on you.


Yup, defective  
That ain't rain, TT: it's white & _cold_....


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Hi Loobo,

I was making the point that _to rain_ isn't defective. In fact it's cited as not being defective in that link you posted.


----------



## Loob

Right, goddit


----------



## ewie

Thomas Tompion said:


> The words are coming thick and fast; they're raining down on you.


Haha ~ touché, Mr.T.
Yes: _defective_ ~ that's the word my (erm ... thingy) memory was trying to conjure up.
Why are we all talking in pink?


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Don't ask me.  My niece started it.


----------



## HankMardukas

Stumbled across this thread because of an email discussion I was having with some friends...

I have used "forwent" regularly for years, both in conversation and in writing. It came up in my email thread because we were discussing what car my friend should buy, and I said I bought a 2010 Acura TSX but forwent the Technology Package, since I don't have use for the nav system and CD changer. "Forgoed" sounds awful to me, even if it can be considered correct. Forwent is much nicer sounding and makes perfect sense in my head. My friend questioned my usage of it, saying he'd never heard it, so I ended up here after a google search. 

Just my $0.02


----------



## preppie

I cannot think of a single instance where I would opt to use forwent.  a) it doesn't flow b) no one would have a clue what I said.

That would make it a foregone conclusion that I would skip/pass up/do without using it.


----------



## natkretep

earcatching said:


> got -- gotten(US)/got(UK), but forgot--forgotten (UK _and_ US), NOT he has *forgot, even in the UK.



Unless you are Robbie Burns:

Should auld acquaintance be forgot ...

I agree that I would avoid _forgoed/forwent_ although the earlier example was sort of (maybe) convincing, 'Would anyone object if we forwent the trip?'


----------



## didaho

Well, whoever said you'll be waiting a long time to hear someone needing the past tense of forgo was right I guess. I just felt the need to use it yesterday, and was a bit flummoxed, googled it and found this thread. So I guess 5 years is how long the wait is  

The context was this, I decided to leave my Fitbit at home when taking our son to the water park, so it wouldn't get wet, but then I wouldn't get credit for the steps. (thats makes more sense if you have a Fitbit or similar) So I wanted to say, "I for(?) my steps to keep my Fitbit dry." But I couldn't complete the sentence, my brain provided absolutely no way to finish that word in past tense. Eventually some part of my brain offered 'forwent' but another part thought, that's not a word I've ever heard.

It had never occurred to me that a verb could exist without also having a past tense. Reading here and other places, I guess it does in fact have a past tense, 'forwent'. Its just that its use is so rare it doesn't sound right to many of us. As someone above mentioned, I think using it with an infinitive sounds more natural to me "I decided to forgo my steps to keep my Fitbit dry."

As for forgoed, that never occurred to me, it just sounds incorrect to me. Perhaps if I heard people use it frequently it wouldn't, but I don't so it doesn't.


----------



## JustCoke

I've lived all over the southern US, from Florida to Texas to Arizona, but I've lived in Wisconsin for the past 12 years. I don't have a discernible accent other than the Standard American Dialect. Forgoed and forwent both sound correct to me. So to add a bit to this conversation on the verb 'Forgo' and its past tense forms, I'd just like to point out the verb 'Dive'. You can say you dived into the pool. You can say you dove into the pool. Both forms are correct in today's English, but 'dived' was the original past tense usage. If speakers of English contain both usages of the verb, then that word now has two proper forms to use. I have my B.A. in Applied Linguistics, so I do not care for the prescriptive viewpoint. One can rebel against the form that a word is taking, but it doesn't change the fact that speakers of a language will do what they want to communicate. Languages change and the moment they stop changing is when that language dies. Languages have a life of their own and to try to staunch the growth of that language only means to try and kill it. Prescriptivists are a language's enemy in that respect. And I ain't gonna support the death of my language. When someone asks me what I've done to help English, I will tell them I forgoed any attempts to subdue my chosen usages. And when they tell me that word sounds funny, I will tell them I forwent the decision to use forwent in that sentence. Because nana-nana-booboo.


----------



## Forero

didaho said:


> As for forgoed, that never occurred to me, it just sounds incorrect to me. Perhaps if I heard people use it frequently it wouldn't, but I don't so it doesn't.


You mean "so it does", right?


----------



## dunescratcheur

newzamt said:


> According to the dictionary, I should say forwent, but I'm convinced forgoed would be more typical in conversation (at least where I live). Am I alone on this, or are there other English speakers who use forgoed?





winklepicker said:


> I hope there aren't any! Sorry! It's _forwent_. I think you're alone.


I was just challenged on my use of _*forewent**_ and on rootling around came upon this jurassic thread. I'm a BE speaker in my 60s with what I consider to be an adequate (but in no way exceptional) education. *Foregoed* sounds ridiculous to my ears and I'd class it with "I done +verb" expressions....that said so much of newish usage offends me and a fair amount of AE merely confusing. Language appears to be changing even faster than it used to, perhaps because of modern technology but maybe also due to a cultural shift away from Prescriptivism. 

IMHO, It doesn't matter too much how regional usage varies but I do think it important that there is enough agreement at a more global level to ensure efficient communication...as is the case with organisations that depend on clarity at an international level: Air Traffic Control, WHO, Embassies etc etc

*with an "e", always


----------



## Loob

dunescratcheur said:


> *with an "e", always


I'm intrigued! So you use _*forego *(= go before)_ but never _*forgo *(= do without)_?


----------



## Thomas Tompion

The American Corpus has 20 examples of _*forwent*_ and 19 of _*forewent*_, most of the 19 clearly a mistake for _*forwent*_.

My favourite is _He forewent the condom._ _Broken Pencil, Jason Elford._

I'll omit more context, out of regard for the modesty of the forum.  What came after the condom you'll have to find out for yourselves.


----------



## dunescratcheur

Loob said:


> I'm intrigued! So you use _*forego *(= go before)_ but never _*forgo *(= do without)_?


Yerst, I do indeed and was brought up to believe that they are merely spelling variants and that the meanings are the same. I note that according to WR that it/they is/are derived from ME _*forgān*_.

BTW: I'm impressed that after a decade you're still around and on duty. I was often elsewhere on WR but have been otherwise engaged for some years. I will endeavour to look in more freqently.


----------



## ewie

Thomas Tompion said:


> My favourite is _He forewent the condom._ _Broken Pencil, Jason Elford._


 

(I'm still here too, Dune ... I've yet to find the exit ...)


----------



## Loob

dunescratcheur said:


> I do indeed and was brought up to believe that they are merely spelling variants and that the meanings are the same


Ah, maybe that's why you were challenged...


Thomas Tompion said:


> My favourite is _He forewent the condom._ _Broken Pencil, Jason Elford._


Love it! 

-------
PS. There's a thread here on the spelling issue: Forego/Forgo.


----------



## dunescratcheur

Loob said:


> Ah, maybe that's why you were challenged...
> Love it!
> 
> -------
> PS. There's a thread here on the spelling issue: Forego/Forgo.


Thanks for that....I can see that we're sort in agreement; non-violently though. I can see that advancing age has confirmed Loob in his opinions, just as it has done for me.

....and ewie/Tommo: it's encouraging to have provoked such immediate reactions, even if TT's is a tad curmudgeonly - relying on the American Corpus indeed


----------



## Uncle Jack

I would just like to chime in to say how surprised I am at the number of people in this thread who would avoid using "forwent". It is part of my ordinary vocabulary. I cannot think that I use it a great deal, simply because the need for it rarely arises, but don't think it is a word I would avoid using, whoever I was speaking to.

It is definitely "forwent", not "forgoed", in this part of the world.

I really cannot imagine using "forego" at all, in any form.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

Uncle Jack said:


> I really cannot imagine using "forego" at all, in any form.



So you never speak of _foregone_ conclusions?


----------



## Uncle Jack

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> So you never speak of _foregone_ conclusions?


Ah! You have me there.


----------



## dunescratcheur

Uncle Jack said:


> I really cannot imagine using "forego" at all, in any form.



....so it's the spelling that gets your goat and not the usage?


----------



## Uncle Jack

dunescratcheur said:


> ....so it's the spelling that gets your goat and not the usage?


"Forgo" and "forego" are two completely different words. I am as prone to making spelling mistakes as other people, but spelling "forgo" as "forego" is wrong. At the time of my earlier post, I could not think any situation where I would use "forego", but GWB reminded me of one.


----------



## dunescratcheur

Uncle Jack said:


> "Forgo" and "forego" are two completely different words. I am as prone to making spelling mistakes as other people, but spelling "forgo" as "forego" is wrong. At the time of my earlier post, I could not think any situation where I would use "forego", but GWB reminded me of one.



I think we're going round in circles. 

The root of both appears to have been the same ME word and at some point there was a spelling variant between the two more modern words. It is more than likely that there was a difference in pronunciation but that this has been lost in the mists of time.  Present day usage has combined  the two spellings almost completely to the extent that you can find support for either team from various dictionaries. I'm of course aware of the two  but have never used the "e" less one. I submit that modern English dictionaries have strayed a long way from prescriptivism (against say, the French) and that it's not just AE ones that struggle with forgo/forego, see below:

from Collins' COBUILD Advanced English Dictionary. Copyright © HarperCollins Publishers.  Forego definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

"forego (fɔːʳgoʊ  ) also forgo
Word forms: 3rd person singular present tense foregoes  , present participle foregoing   , past tense forewent  , past participle foregone 
VERB
If you forego something, you decide to do without it, although you would like it".

from Collins English Dictionary. Copyright © HarperCollins Publishers

"forego
in British English
(fɔːˈɡəʊ  )
VERB
Word forms: -goes, -going, -went or -gone
(transitive) a variant spelling of forgo"


So, in conclusion, I'm certain that at some time in the not too distant past you were absolutely right and I  - or rather my parents/grandparents - were absolutely wrong. Nowadays, not so much


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

dunescratcheur said:


> The root of both appears to have been the same ME word and at some point there was a spelling variant between the two more modern words.



No, that is not correct.  Both come from Old English, and even in Old English they were two different words.  "Forgo" comes from the Old English _forgan_, with the "for-" prefix indicating loss, destruction, or opposition of some kind; it is the same prefix found in "forbid" or "forget." "Forego", on the other hand, comes from _foregan_, with the prefix "fore-" indicating before or ahead; it is the same prefix one finds in "foretell" or "forerunner."  I am afraid this explodes the rest of your argument that the distinction between the two words -- which has existed for more than 1,000 years, and which is based on their having two entirely different prefixes attached to the root "go" -- is merely a matter of "a spelling variant."  If the spelling varies between these two words it is because they vary in their origins and in their meanings.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

"a foregone conclusion" vs. "a forewent conclusion": the first form is past participle, the second past tense.

I say we forgo tying ourselves in knots and go with GWB's suggestion in #7 ("had to forego"): "We'll have to forgo our planned visit because of the Trump virus."; "I had to forgo my evening yoga session because something came up."; "I decided to forego wearing my Fitbit to the water park because I'm not sure it's waterproof.",etc.

(Self-censored to remove forbidden humor.)


----------

