# Built/builded



## Elisa68

EDIT: Discussion moved from the Italian forum.



			
				aqidah said:
			
		

> The house will be built within 3 weeks (passive)
> La casa sara' costruita entro tre settimane


 Hope you don't mind.


----------



## aqidah

For your information the verb 'to build' has both the irregular and regular form in the past participle.

Eg I builded a house or I built a house.

This is also the case of verb to dream. Eg I dreamed or I dreamt.


----------



## moodywop

aqidah said:
			
		

> For your information the verb 'to build' has both the irregular and regular form in the past participle.
> 
> Eg I builded a house or I built a house.
> 
> This is also the case of verb to dream. Eg I dreamed or I dreamt.


 
Elisa is right. _Built _is the only correct form for the past and past participle of _build_.

You are right about _dream. Learn _also has two forms in the past/past participle, _learned _and _learnt. Learnt _is only used in BE.


----------



## aqidah

According to British English, the past participle of "build" is Built or Builded.
The form Builded was not only used in the past by many poets and writer or in the Bible, but it also used in current English.

Just visit the BBC website and type "builded" and you will see in how many articles this word appear. You can also search on Oxford University website.






Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythig different from that is wrong. I think that the only English per par excellentia is the English developed in Britain, it's original place of development.


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks for the vociferous opinions on a multitude of topics.

Builded is not the past participle of 'to build'.  



> *builded* was not found in the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary


If you type 'builded' into the query box for the Oxford English Dictionary, it offers this:



> New search:
> Select entry: built built (in build) Rome wasn’t built in a day (in Rome) well built built /bIlt/ combining form (after adverbs and in compound adjectives) made in the particular way that is mentioned: a newly built station http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/images/xsym.gif American-built cars—see also purpose-built, well built


Both of these are BE sources.


----------



## nycphotography

aqidah said:
			
		

> Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythig different from that is wrong. I think that the only English per par excellentia is the English developed in Britain, it's original place of development.


 
All you really had to say was that it's BE usage vs AE, and save yourself the embarassment.


----------



## lsp

aqidah said:
			
		

> Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythi*n*g different from that is wrong. I think that the only English per par excellentia is the English developed in Britain, it's *its *original place of development.


I think we agree on both sides of the pond that the possessive "its" has no apostrophe.


----------



## LV4-26

I was surprised by this thread as I've always heard and read "_built_" and never "_builded_". So I had a look on the internet. It seems (according to a few sites) that _build_ is what is called a "redundant" verb so that both forms are accepted in BE. 

*However*
- not all British sites give both forms as correct (the BBC doesn't, for instance http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv85.shtml)
- I'm not sure all British speakers use "_builded_". I'm not even sure they're simply aware they can use it.


----------



## bbmkw

It would be improper to say "I builded a house."  It should be "I built a house."


----------



## panjandrum

The OED lists builded as poetic or archaic.
Sounds accurate to me (they will be pleased ).


----------



## timpeac

I have never knowingly said or read "builded" before, perhaps when I was two...


----------



## aqidah

I have posted less than 30 messages so I am not allowed to post links in my messages.

Check this out:

From UPNE (University Press of New England)
Dartmouth College Press - book:

Miraculously *Builded* in Our Hearts
A Dartmouth Reader
*Lathem, Edward Connery and David M. Shribman, eds.

*


----------



## GenJen54

I did a bit of gooling. 

*Builded* = 490,000 results - mostly biblical and poetic references among the top 100 search results.

*Built* = 437,000,000 results.

P.S. 
I also attempted to go to "google wars," but um...well, I don't think I found the right site - although I got some kind of sight!!  

BE prominance or no, the numbers speak for themselves, as do the British-speaking natives who have herein validated the usage of "built."



> Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythig different from that is wrong.


Not to get cheeky, but I beg to differ. Greatly.


----------



## timpeac

> Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythig different from that is wrong.


 If most of Americans believe that, which smaller part of them is it that disagrees?


----------



## GenJen54

aqidah said:
			
		

> I have posted less than 30 messages so I am not allowed to post links in my messages.
> 
> Check this out:
> 
> From UPNE (University Press of New England)
> Dartmouth College Press - book:
> 
> Miraculously *Builded* in Our Hearts
> A Dartmouth Reader
> *Lathem, Edward Connery and David M. Shribman, eds.*


 
Yes. This is a *literary* journal, filled with *literary* works. 

I don't believe anyone is arguing the existence or non-existence of the word, so much as its frequency and use in everyday English - BE and AE. In *literary* works, including biblical references and poetry, "builded" is apt. 

It is not apt, however, in an everyday context, unless one happens to be an English Lit. professor or biblical scholar. Even then, its use would more than likely be considered as "posh."


----------



## timpeac

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> Yes. This is a literary journal, filled with literary works.
> 
> I don't believe anyone is arguing the existence or non-existence of the word, so much as its frequency and use in everyday English - BE and AE. In literary works, including biblical references and poetry, "builded" is apt.
> 
> It is not apt, however, in an everyday context, unless one happens to be an English Lit. professor or biblical scholar. Even then, its use would more than likely be considered as "posh."


 
I don't disagree with the evidence found to show that "builded" exists but - and perhaps this just reflects badly on me - if I were to read "builded" I would assume it was an error, not consider it "posh", because I have honestly never seen it before this thread.


----------



## cuchuflete

Franklin McDuffee of   the  Darmouth class of 1921 wrote "*Dartmouth Undying*," and it was in no way representative of the spoken English, either British or American, of his era. Read the verses of that very sentimental song. 




> Who can forget her sharp and misty mornings,
> The clanging bells, the crunch of feet on snow,
> Her sparkling moons, the crowding into Commons,
> The long white afternoons, the twilight glow?
> See! By the light of many thousand sunsets
> Dartmouth Undying like a vision starts:
> Dartmouth, the gleaming, dreaming walls of Dartmouth,
> Miraculously builded in our hearts!


----------



## LV4-26

_Miraculously Builded in our Hearts _is a compilation of essays, songs and poems related to Dartmouth College. Its title was taken from a song that is "a favorite of the glee club" as pointed out by a reader who also happens to be a Dartmouth graduate (1934).

I don't know about that specific song but I believe some of the songs may date back to the foundation of the College.



PS : Dartmouth was founded in...1769.


----------



## bartonig

aqidah said:
			
		

> According to British English, the past participle of "build" is Built or Builded.
> The form Builded was not only used in the past by many poets and writer or in the Bible, but it also used in current English.
> 
> Just visit the BBC website and type "builded" and you will see in how many articles this word appear. You can also search on Oxford University website.
> 
> Most of Americans believe that Am English is the only correct English, and anythig different from that is wrong. I think that the only English per par excellentia is the English developed in Britain, it's original place of development.


_Builded _is not in current use in standard British English. It may have been used in the past and it may be again in the future but, it isn't today. The BBC website search engine is not a dictionary or corpus. Nor is yahoo.com or any other search engine unless it declares itself to be a dictionary or corpus. A few minutes playing with the BBC search facility shows that you get the same results for _builded_, _building _and _build _and, then, if you make a search on _builded _with the browser's page search facility _builded _doesn't appear! My guess is that the engine strips off the morphemes _ed _and _ing _and just makes a search on build. Thus, all that is proved is that that BBC writers use the word _build _in some of their reports. For other reasons I have my doubts about the validity or usefulness of posts that use yahoo as a corpus.


----------



## timpeac

bartonig said:
			
		

> _Builded _is not in current use in standard British English. It may have been used in the past and it may be again in the future but, it isn't today. The BBC website search engine is not a dictionary or corpus. Nor is yahoo.com or any other search engine unless it declares itself to be a dictionary or corpus. A few minutes playing with the BBC search facility shows that you get the same results for _builded_, _building _and _build _and, then, if you make a search on _builded _with the browser's page search facility _builded _doesn't appear! My guess is that the engine strips off the morphemes _ed _and _ing _and just makes a search on build. Thus, all that is proved is that that BBC writers use the word _build _in some of their reports. For other reasons I have my doubts about the validity or usefulness of posts that use yahoo as a corpus.


 
You're probably right - good sleuthing Sherlock!


----------



## aqidah

*Books sold on Amazon where the word "builded" appears in the title.*

Titles:

*"In the builded place"*
by Micheal Heller
Coffee House Press 
Paperback - January 1990 

"*Of the Hut I Builded: Archaeology of Australia"*
~John Mulvaney (Foreword), et al
Cambridge University Press 
Hardcover - February 9, 1989 

"*Miraculously Builded in Our Herts: A Dartmouth Reader*
~Lathem, et al
University Press of New England 
Hardcover - September 1, 1999 

*Lo, there is builded a City*
~Thomas Carl Whitmer
C. C. Birchard & Co 
Unknown Binding - 1923 

*Widom hath builded her house: A sermon preached before the University of Sussex, Brighton, 21 October 1962* (Sussex University)
~Daniel Thomas Jenkins
Sussex U.P 
Unknown Binding - 1962 

*I builded my Ship*
~Katharine E Barry
Boosey & Co 

*They builded better than they knew (Essay index reprint series)*
~Julius Henry Cohen
Books for Libraries Press 
Unknown Binding - 1971


----------



## timpeac

Aqidah - you forgot to draw a conclusion there


----------



## foxfirebrand

Amazon titles! What an irrefutable source for the currency of a word-- especially given the propensity of so many authors and authoresses to filch phrases from the (early 17th century) King James Bible to fashion their titles withal.

And what a compendium of proof. Methinks, aquidah, in the words of that inobsolescently imperishable tome of Holy Writ, thou hast builded an abomination before the Lord! And speaking of things abdominal, let's round up a fatted calf and celebrate!
.


----------



## LV4-26

aqidah, you're really hard to convince 

This is my last attempt : I'm not going to do the same for all the books you've mentionned

The following is a comment about the book or article entitled _They builded better than they knew_



> In the end it may be said, along with the unknown poet who published these lines in the Silverton Standard on January 3, *1903*:  A_nd                when the throng of eager men—
> Men of heroic mould and true—
> Wrought mines that silver might be had
> *               They builded better than they knew*—
> These men now gone._​


 I'd be surprised if we didn't find a link with an old song or poem or any old piece of writing in the title of all the books you've mentionned.

For #4 and #5, we need not even search : just look at the other words of the title.


----------



## cuchuflete

Aquidah clearly knows that 'builded' is in current use because a number of book titles include the word. Yet, when I was forced to learn the lyrics cited above, and referenced in one of those titles, way back in the late 1960s, it sounded archaic. Then I realized that 'built' would not have fit the meter of the song, which has more than its share of other very old-fashioned usages.

Quite a few BE and AE speakers have said that the word is archaic, and never used in normal speech today. A web search turns up some examples of it in book titles. Conclusion: of course the word is in current use.

I'm off to prove that the earth is flat, with google as my proof source.


----------



## GenJen54

Usage in a *literary* context - even in the title of books - is *not* indicative of _everyday_ usage. 

It only supports your argument that the word exists - which no one has denied.


----------



## aqidah

What about ...

 "*Of the Hut I Builded: Archaeology of Australia"
* ~John Mulvaney (Foreword), et al
  Cambridge University Press 
 Hardcover - February 9, *1989 


*Why you quote one book from 1903, and you do not not quote the one from* 1989*?

Is this book about religion or the Bible? It seems to be about Archaeology.

This book simply destroy your theory. "Builded" might be not of common use, but it cannot be considered a grammatical mistake. 

Will Cambridge University Press publish a book with a grammatical mistake in the title?


----------



## ElaineG

aqidah said:
			
		

> What about ...
> 
> "*Of the Hut I Builded: Archaeology of Australia"*
> ~John Mulvaney (Foreword), et al
> Cambridge University Press
> Hardcover - February 9, *1989 *
> 
> 
> Why you quote one book from 1903, and you do not not quote the one from* 1989*?
> 
> Is this book about religion or the Bible? It seems to be about Archaeology.
> 
> This book simply destroys your theory. "Builded" might be not of common use, but it cannot be considered a grammatical mistake.
> 
> Would Cambridge University Press publish a book with a grammatical mistake in the title?


 
The book in question traces archeology in Australia from _1780 to the present_. The phrase 'Of the Hut I Builded' appears in quotes in the title (the actual title is: 'Of the Hut I Builded': Archeology of Australia), clearly indicating that the author has quoted this phrase, presumably from an archaic source.

The OED, which was quoted to you by Panjandrum some posts back, is about as authoritative source as you can get for British English usage. If it says "archaic" or "poetic", you would do well to believe it.

But, please feel free to use "builded"; it will mark you as a non-native speaker in any English speaking country, and be treated as a mistake in any text you write, _except for_ poetry, or _quoting_ an ancient source. But if that is how you wish to sound, I don't think we should try to stop you.


----------



## GenJen54

Thanks to uncle Webster, here is a link to all of the facts one would ever wish to know about the word builded. Those with access to the British National Corpus may be able to come up with more evidence. 

Of particular note is this:



> "*BUILDED*" is used about 3 times out of a sample of 100 million words spoken or written in English.


3 out of 100 million. Hmmm. Does not seem like standard or common or even "correct" usage to me.


			
				aqilah said:
			
		

> "Builded" might be not of common use, but it cannot be considered a grammatical mistake.


It can if it is not part of common *use in everyday language*.

Using your same Amazon logic, I queried the number of books with "builded" then "built" in the title. Approximately 17 titles were pulled for "builded." More than 4,000 titles appeared with "built."

With this, I part in peace!


----------



## lsp

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> I'm off to prove that the earth is flat, with google as my proof source.


Brilliant! You have forever put forth the ultimate example, and ended my quest of how best to illustrate the inadequacy of using google results by themselves as proof of the legitimacy of anything. Using quotes "the earth is flat" - 189,000; "the earth is not flat" - a mere 20,000.


----------



## foxfirebrand

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> With this, I part in peace!


_Pax vobiscum,_ then.

In case you don't know, that's Italian-- I'm sure as a language-challenged and bigoted American you had a hard time recognizing that.  It's the only proper type of Italian there is, in my opinion, even though most of those 21st-century natives of that venerable peninsula think they speak the only proper form.  Well they're wrong!  Especially the Lombardians.
.


----------



## cuchuflete

Dear LSP,
You have persuaded me. Nearly 9 out of 10 google citations prove, with perfect clarity, that the shape of the sphere flat plain we inhabit was builded such that if I begin walking to the north, east, south or west, and am persistent enough, I will eventually have worn-out soles, and will go over the edge.  

I am in your eternal debt.
Cuchu


----------



## panjandrum

What a totally fatuous but fascinating conversation this has turned out to be.
The British National Corpus lists 3 examples of builded, 12,674 of built.


----------



## foxfirebrand

panjandrum said:
			
		

> What a totally fatuous but fascinating conversation this has turned out to be.
> The British National Corpus lists 3 examples of builded, 12,674 of built.


Make that 4 examples-- I just builded a lily.
.


----------



## Brioche

foxfirebrand said:
			
		

> Make that 4 examples-- I just builded a lily.
> .


 
Was that before or after you gilded it?


----------



## aqidah

*Verb Morphology*

*by Mark J. Jones*
*Cambridge University*


In standard varieties of English such as SSBE and General American, we see a number of different ways of forming the past tense of strong verbs and the past participle. The most basic difference we see between different varieties is in the membership of the strong verb class.
American English 'dive' is a strong verb having the past tense 'dove' , whwewas in British English this verb is weak, with a past tense 'dived'.

Edwards (1993:20) notes that a large number of verbs which are weak in some dialects of British English are not weak in the standard, e.g knowed, throwed, *builded*.

Mod comment - I had to cut down your post here because it infringes our rule of no more than 4 sentences to be quoted (to protect against copyright issues). Feel free to add a link to the full text if you have one or edit the post to a different 4 lines if you feel these were not the most applicable.


----------



## aqidah

For FoxFireBrand

_Pax Vobiscum_ is Latin not Italian. Those are two completely different languages. There is no a single linguist or grammarian who affirms that Italian is a dialect derived from Latin. 

The only dialect developed from Latin is Volgare, the language used first by Dante.


----------



## timpeac

aqidah said:
			
		

> Edwards (1993:20) notes that a large number of verbs which are weak in some dialects of British English are not weak in the standard, e.g knowed, throwed, *builded*.


 
Aquidah - your unwillingness to accept what all native speakers here have told you about a common verb in their language is truly astonishing, I don't think I've ever come across a similar case.

I think you may have misunderstood the quote (but since again you didn't actually draw a conclusion it's hard to tell for sure) - it is evidence _against_ what you are saying -

a large number of verbs which are weak in some dialects of British English are not weak in the standard =

a large number of verbs are not weak in the standard =

a large number of verbs are strong in the standard =

build/built in the standard.

Does your own source now convince you? If not I am really not sure what you are trying to prove. Honestly - although "builded" may exist in dialect/archaic/poetic English (not that I've seen it before) - if you start walking around saying "I builded" people will laugh at you. If you don't want to believe the several native speakers here on this language site then ask the first English speaker you meet. I _promise_ you they will tell you "builded" is wrong.


----------



## timpeac

Suzi (and others) yes this side alley of Italian/Latin is off-topic for this thread. Please start a new one to discuss further. Any more comments on it in this thread will be deleted as off-topic. Thanks. Tim, moderator.


----------



## aqidah

To be honest I am not trying to prove anything, except that the word builded exists. I did not even started the thred.

I initially replied to a question on how to form the passive voice in Italian, and because in my sentence appeared the word builded, the moderator took my reply from the Italian forum and put it into the English Forum.

When I finally find more information on the word builded and I post a full interesting article, the moderator cut the article on the word builded, so that it makes no sense. The moderator told me to post the link, while a message appears saying I am not allowed to post links.

I am starting to feel angry, because I am not free to quote any source, neither links. Now I have been  told I cannot post a full article taken from free material available in the internet, because I am violating intellectual right.

It seems there is no chance in this forum to reach any conclusion, because the moderator prevent me from quoting the sources.



​


----------



## timpeac

Aquidah - members can't post links until they have a certain number of posts. PM the link to me and I will post it here.

We are not trying to prevent you from proving anything - everyone above has agreed that "builded" exists in dialect/poetry/archaic English - so if that is your point it has already been made. People are just advising you that the word is no longer used in common speech, either in the UK or US.


----------



## aqidah

Interesting article on this topic:

*PDF]* The Structure of *English*: Morphology and Phonology
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
intimate, and it would be no surprise if bilingualism was *common*. *...* of British
*English* are not weak in the standard, eg knowed, throwed, *builded*. *...*
kiri.ling.cam.ac.uk/mark/2005SOE8.pdf

_______________________________


Maybe now I am allowed to post links...


----------



## timpeac

Aqidah - now have posted your source would you like to notice it is actually saying that build is a strong verb in standard English? (= build/built)


----------



## LV4-26

Tim said:
			
		

> build is a strong verb in standard English? (= build/built)


Just to make things clear for everybody :
*weak* verbs : regular verbs (ending in -ed)
*strong *verbs and *not weak* verbs : irregular verbs
They're _strong_ when there's a change in vowel quality. If they're just irregular with no vowel change, like_ build_ in modern standard English, Jones (in the quoted article) just calls them _non weak.

_


			
				aqidah said:
			
		

> Why you quote one book from 1903, and you do not not quote the one from* 1989*?


No, no, that book was written in 1971 as you rightly pointed out yourself.
I just said that its title had been taken from a 1903 poem.

EDIT :
I'll suggest a conclusion that will hopefully settle the question :
_Build _can still be considered as a "redundant" verb (i.e. both weak and non weak),* in theory. *But its weak form is no longer used in modern standard English.


----------



## panjandrum

I have just been amusing myself by summarising (HAHA) the evidence that has been adduced in this thread. 

#4
The BBC website is said to include examples of the use of builded. 
I went to BBC online and put builded into the search. I got a screenful of hits. These include two facetious examples of "team-builded" (their quotation marks); one link to the English hymn Jerusalem, written by William Blake (1757-1827); two links that make direct reference to that hymn in relation to Denmark; and one link that includes these words, quoted precisely, "... the antisipation was builded up ...".

#5
Cambridge Advanced Learners' Dictionary - builded not found.
OED offers only examples using built.

#8
BBC language site gives only built.

#10
OED lists builded as poetic or archaic.

#12
Builded is quoted in one book title.

#13
Google has 437,000,000 built, 490,000 builded.

#21
Explains that the book title in #12 is from a 1921 song.

#27
A book entitled "Of the Hut I builded" is given as an example, "This book simply destroy your theory," that builded is non-standard. In fact, the book title is a quotation from an Australian poem written by Henry Lawson (1867-1922).

#29
Webster: builded is used 3 times in 100,000,000 words spoken or written in English.
An online bookseller lists 17 books with builded in the title, 4,000 with built in the title.

#33
The BNC lists 3 instances of builded, 12,674 of built.

#36
Makes reference to "Verb Morphology" which in fact notes that builded is not standard English.

#42
... refers to a different article citing the same source and places together these two quotations as if they were part of the same statement:
"... intimate, and it would be no surprise if bilingualism was *common*."
"*...* of British *English* are not weak in the standard, eg knowed, throwed, *builded*. *..."*

In fact, the first is from page 2 of the reference, the second is from page 4. It is inappropriate, and I can't escape from suggesting that it is misleading, to place these together as if they somehow supported the view that builded was part of some standard English.
---------------------------------​ 
I conclude that there is overwhelming evidence in support of *built* being the normal, ubiquitous, standard usage in all areas of English.

As demonstrated by the OED definition (and others) and the various well-aged literary examples, *builded* appears in a very small number of "poetic or archaic" situations.

Someone using *builded* in normal conversation would be viewed as illiterate, or assumed to be two years old - or just possibly might be considered to be alluding to Jerusalem, builded here in England's green and pleasant land (among the dark satanic mills).


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks Panj.  You've builded a good case.  Now that we have beated this topic to death, it might be good to move on to other rare, arcane words.


----------



## Heartcutter

I was just in Cleveland, and there is a building downtown with a large inscription reading "... builded by her citizens ..." It looks ridiculous, and prompted my search to resolve this issue.


----------



## cyberpedant

I have seen Him in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps
They have *builded* Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps;
His day is marching on.

From The Battle Hymn of the Republic, Julia Ward Howe.


----------



## KHS

When we get this type of corpus data:

100millionword BNC (1980s-1993):
builded - 4 (for some reason, different from Panjandrum's 3)
built - 12674

360millword BYU AmEng:
builded - 15
built - 38867

it's probably a good indication that, if you are a NNS of English who wants to sound correct to most native speakers of the language, you should use _built_.


----------



## panjandrum

KHS said:


> When we get this type of corpus data:
> 
> 100millionword BNC (1980s-1993):
> builded - 4 (for some reason, different from Panjandrum's 3)
> [...]


If you look at the four you will see that two of them are the same quote.
1  B0Y     a ferry service between Southwark and the City of London "before any bridge was *builded*". OMF iii 6. overseer, see VESTRY, THE PARISH. overstep   
2  ACG     burnt offering? Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps, And *builded * parapets and trenches there, And stretched forth the knife to slay his son.  
3  FTT     of Carying Lintseed 18:6:0 1730 " That there is a new church to be *builded * in Killdaltane parish, and alsoe the churches of Killearow & Kilchoman to be repaird  
4  FTT     of Carying Lintseed 18:6:0 1730 " That there is a new church to be *builded * in Killdaltane parish, and alsoe the churches of Killearow & Kilchoman to be repaird


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

cyberpedant said:


> I have seen Him in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps
> They have *builded* Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
> I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps;
> His day is marching on.
> 
> From The Battle Hymn of the Republic, Julia Ward Howe.


 
Howe's poem intentionally uses Biblical language and images (e.g., trampling out the vintage of the grapes of wrath, etc.)  The form "builded" is used throughout the 1611 Authorized or King James Version translation of the Bible:

Genesis 8:20 _And Noah* builded* an altar unto the LORD_;

Job 20:19_ Because he hath oppressed and hath forsaken the poor; because he hath violently taken away an house which he* builded* not;_

Proverbs 9:1 _Wisdom hath* builded* her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:_

Et cetera...


----------



## cyberpedant

It also makes for better rhythm.


----------



## KHS

cyberpedant said:


> It also makes for better rhythm.


 
Yes, but that could be solved by doing something like, "they have built him up an altar...."


----------



## LouisaB

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> Howe's poem intentionally uses Biblical language and images (e.g., trampling out the vintage of the grapes of wrath, etc.) The form "builded" is used throughout the 1611 Authorized or King James Version translation of the Bible:


 
I totally agree. The same applies to all the usages I'm familiar with, eg Blake's 'Jerusalem'. I think Tolkien uses 'builded' somewhere (The Silmarillion??) again in an attempt to evoke Biblical overtones.

Louisa


----------



## timpeac

KHS said:


> it's probably a good indication that, if you are a NNS of English who wants to sound correct to most native speakers of the language, you should use _built_.



I think it's also a good indication that if you are a native speaker of English who wants to sound correct to most native speakers you should use _built_.

I find it hard to believe that this tedious thread has any mileage left in it.

Edit - I don't mean to sound harsh there to the people who have just joined the thread, it's just that the first time round there proved only so many ways of saying "this is not good normal modern day usage"!


----------



## KHS

timpeac said:


> I think it's also a good indication that if you are a native speaker of English who wants to sound correct to most native speakers you should use _built_.


 
That *should* be true, but the fact is, when you are a NS, you get lots more latitude.  People often assume that it must be a regional usage of some type.  If you're a NNS, people assume you're *wrong.* 

I remember a Greek I knew made the only grammar "mistake" I'd ever heard him make.  He said, "If I was rich..." When I said something about being surprised that he'd used that construction, he told me that native speakers always corrected him when he said, "If I were..." and he eventually forgot which one was grammar-book correct.

No one has ever corrected me for using an "If I were ......" expression.


----------



## timpeac

KHS said:


> That *should* be true, but the fact is, when you are a NS, you get lots more latitude.  People often assume that it must be a regional usage of some type.  If you're a NNS, people assume you're *wrong.*


Absolutely. But in this case "builded", in modern usage, is just wrong - it's not a regional usage (judging from this thread and from the percentages of the usage).


----------



## anglomania1

panjandrum said:


> The OED lists builded as poetic or archaic.
> Sounds accurate to me (they will be pleased ).


Exactly! The only time I've even seen "builded" is in William Blake's "And did those feet in ancient time"!! Rather archaic.
If any student of mine used it today I'd correct them!
Sorry klemmelk - didn't see your post! But Jerusalem is from over 200 years ago so not exactly common or current usage!
We also use doth and dost when citing Shakespeare, but nobody goes round saying it otherwise!


----------



## DonnyB

anglomania1 said:


> Exactly! The only time I've even seen "builded" is in William Blake's "And did those feet in ancient time"!! Rather archaic.
> If any student of mine used it today I'd correct them!
> Sorry klemmelk - didn't see your post! But Jerusalem is from over 200 years ago so not exactly common or current usage!
> We also use doth and dost when citing Shakespeare, but nobody goes round saying it otherwise!


That's the only time I've ever seen "builded" used as the past participle either - and I suspect that was only to fit the metre of the poem: in the second verse it says "built".


----------



## anglomania1

DonnyB said:


> I suspect that was only to fit the metre of the poem: in the second verse it says "built".


My thoughts exactly!


----------

