# bring - brang - brung :)



## MrMagoo

Hello everybody,

I would like to know who of you uses "brang" and "brung" (past tense and past participle of *bring*) instead of _brought_.
(Even if it's only in spoken, and not in written English)

Who of you uses "brought" but would not regard "bring" and "brung" to be wrong?! 
Who of you only uses "brought" and would say "brang" and "brung" are wrong?!


Thanks for your opinions! 

Best wishes
-MrMagoo


----------



## CAMullen

Not to wave my nose in the air and feign superiority over anyone else, but I doubt that users of "brang" and "brung" would be very interested in the finer points of English usage.


----------



## Conchita57

You can put me between the second and the third category (it reminds me of a certain station platform in the first Harry Potter film!).  I mean that, to me, _bring, brought, brought _is standard English, whereas _bring, brang, brung_ is used in some dialects, or so I've heard.


----------



## MrMagoo

Conchita57 said:
			
		

> You can put me between the second and the third category (it reminds me of a certain station platform in the first Harry Potter film!). I mean that, to me, _bring, brought, brought _is standard English, whereas _bring, brang, brung_ is used in some dialects, or so I've heard.


 
Oh yep, I know that "brang/brung" is not standard, but I just want to know whether you find these forms weird or inaccurate in any way or whether you'd accept them to be okay; would you e.g. "correct" children who say "brang/brung" and tell them to say "brought"?


----------



## MrMagoo

CAMullen said:
			
		

> Not to wave my nose in the air and feign superiority over anyone else, but I doubt that users of "brang" and "brung" would be very interested in the finer points of English usage.


 
I see... so you'd say these forms are used only by people who have no greater knowledge of their language?!


----------



## Span_glish

Mark Twain in *Adventures of Huckleberry Finn* wrote:  "_I give her a turn with the paddle and *brung* her nose to shore; then I got my gun and slipped out and into the edge of the woods_."

It was entirely written in the first-person point of view, in the vernacular tounge of an uneducated boy living on the Mississippi River during the 1840s.  (Sorry I can't give you the reference, I'm not allowed to post URLS yet)

That might explain why it's mostly used in the South.


----------



## CAMullen

I don't think it's just Southern, but I do think it's uneducated.


----------



## panjandrum

You have got to be joking 
I have never heard brang.
Children sometimes say brung as both past tense and participle, but usually have grown out of it by the age of four.


----------



## CAMullen

No, I am serious. I was born in the late forties in a poor factory city ten miles north of Boston, and occasionally heard it there in the fifties. I haven't heard it used in decades, but bear in mind that back then, there were people who didn't listen regularly to radio, let alone television, cell (or any) phone, or any form of mass communication. Today, most people alive have probably never heard anyone use "brang."


----------



## CAMullen

Let me just break the deafening silence by saying, Yes Mr. Magoo, I'd say these forms are used only by people who have no greater knowledge of their language. At least of the prescriptive rules of their language, since they (and we) would all understand what they were saying.


----------



## MrMagoo

Interesting answers, thanks everyone for your replies!!


----------



## Tresley

I have never heard anyone use the words "brang" and "brung".
However, I have heard people say "bought" when they mean "brought". E.g. "I bought it over to you earlier today".


----------



## You little ripper!

According to Wikipedia, _you will find more uses of "brang"and "brung" in Dublin than you will of "æ", but neither are acceptable as modern standard English._
According to Webster's dictionary, _brang_ and _brung _are Scottish for _brought._


----------



## panjandrum

OK - I understand the logic behind the use of brang and brung.
As I said, kids learning the patterns of word manipulation will do this kind of thing all the time - they will say I runned, until they learn to say I ran.

Although I have heard brung, as part of this learning process, I have not heard anyone say brang, hence the  

The Wiki reference to Dublin, bring, brang and ae, is part of a discussion - and in any case, all Wiki needs to be read with critical faculties and natural scepticism fully alerted.

OK, I confess to having heard brung used facetiously.
OK, OK, I confess to having used brung - for fun - I swear it


----------



## You little ripper!

panjandrum said:
			
		

> OK - I understand the logic behind the use of brang and brung.
> As I said, kids learning the patterns of word manipulation will do this kind of thing all the time - they will say I runned, until they learn to say I ran.
> 
> Although I have heard brung, as part of this learning process, I have not heard anyone say brang, hence the
> 
> The Wiki reference to Dublin, bring, brang and ae, is part of a discussion - and in any case, all Wiki needs to be read with critical faculties and natural scepticism fully alerted.
> 
> OK, I confess to having heard brung used facetiously.
> OK, OK, I confess to having used brung - for fun - I swear it


You're being oversensitive Panj. I didn't quote Wiki to contradict you.  My point, which I probably didn't make very clearly, is that it seems dialectal because it appears to be heard in Scotland and Ireland. 
What part of Ireland are you from anyway?


----------



## timpeac

I know that "brang" - rightly or wrongly - hits my ear like a slap with a smoked kipper because I wince every time I hear it in this song -

http://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/p/playme.shtml

A song I find otherwise beautiful and poetic.


----------



## CAMullen

You're right. It does demand a lot of the listener to forgive the harshness of the word to enjoy the rest of the song. That happens to me, too.


----------



## thebeagle56

Not to be a snob, but "brang" and "brung" make me cringe. I hear them quite often, and to me, they have a connotation of lack of education. I live in the South (I'm not from the South, though), so I hear it quite often. That may be a stereotype, though; anyway, brought sounds so much better.

In reference to post #8, I do indeed hear "brung" more often as the past participle among young children, but only up to about age 5 or so.


----------



## elroy

I would only ever say "brought."

I would undoubtedly consider them dialectical, and would most certainly correct a child who used them. 

As others have said, "brang" sounds especially dissonant.  Not that "brung" sounds good, but I'd be more likely to expect it.


----------



## grumpus

MrMagoo said:
			
		

> Hello everybody,
> 
> I would like to know who of you uses "brang" and "brung" (past tense and past participle of *bring*) instead of _brought_.
> (Even if it's only in spoken, and not in written English)
> 
> Who of you uses "brought" but would not regard "bring" and "brung" to be wrong?!
> Who of you only uses "brought" and would say "brang" and "brung" are wrong?!
> 
> 
> Thanks for your opinions!
> 
> Best wishes
> -MrMagoo




HI Mr Magoo,
I use brought, but a lot of my family uses brang and brung  ( also I have ate or I have aten).
It's definitely a question of "education".  Brang/brung would be stigmatized as uneducated.
Although I am sure "educated" speakers may say "brung" some times when they are not being careful.

Grumpus


----------



## FrancescaVR

CAMullen said:
			
		

> I don't think it's just Southern, but I do think it's uneducated.


 
================================
 
I'd agree with you


----------



## cas29

It grates on my ear too, to hear brang and brung - but you do hear them.  I have to agree that I equate this kind of usage with lack of eductation.  -- or as mentioned, small children (or adult learners) overgeneralizing on rules).

My 4 year old niece recently made an error in something she was doing, and my sister asked her "Did you forget?" - The little one's reply was , "No mummy, not THAT many!" A puzzled look elicited "I only THREE-GETTED!"


----------



## maxiogee

In 55 years in Dublin I have never, ever come across the use of *brang*.

As panjandrum says we used brung when we were young, most notedly in the riposte to someone who would deride one's manners by asking "Where were you brought up?". The accepted answer to such a 'challenge' was... 
* "I wasn't brought up, I was brung up! 
And people like you should be strung up!"*
I don't know if this derived from children emulating their elders' use of 'brung" or was just children revelling in the poetry of words. I don't recall hearing 'brung' for a long time and can't quite imagine anyone saying something like "I brung me car to the garage" (that 'me' is a Dublinism/Irishism for 'my'.)


----------



## Brioche

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> You're being oversensitive Panj. I didn't quote Wiki to contradict you.  My point, which I probably didn't make very clearly, is that it seems dialectal because it appears to be heard in Scotland and Ireland.
> What part of Ireland are you from anyway?[/quote]
> 
> Panj is obviously from Northern Ireland -
> you can tell the other sort from their interpupillary distance.
> 
> I've heard both _brang _and _brung_.


----------



## Christine-Brinn

Brioche said:
			
		

> Charles Costante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard both _brang _and _brung_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you tell me in exactly what region of the UK you heard either/both of these words?
Click to expand...


----------



## You little ripper!

Christine-Brinn said:
			
		

> Could you tell me in exactly what region of the UK you heard either/both of these words?


Christine, I think we are having problems with the computer program because I didn't make that statement. I had problems with the names being switched around with this post. I had to correct it manually.


----------



## Kelly B

Christine-Brinn said:
			
		

> Could you tell me in exactly what region of the UK you heard either/both of these words?


The quote was from Brioche, who is from Australia.


----------



## maxiogee

I'd say Brioche has heard an Irishism from the descendants of some of our historic 'exports'!


----------



## marget

Once we learn the principal parts of the verb and if we know how to apply the rules, we probably won't say "brang or brung" at all.  When I was first learning my verbs, we would joke and say "bring, brang, brung,...sing, sang, sung.  The correct formation of "sing" causes the confusion.  I don't hear "brang" much anymore.  I can't even imagine hearing "brung"  In American English.  These days, many native speakers (even fairly well-educated, whatever that means!) don't use the past participles of irregular verbs.  I hear "they had already went", "they shoulda' did it, etc.


----------



## panjandrum

Charles Costante said:
			
		

> Christine, I think we are having problems with the computer program because I didn't make that statement. I had problems with the names being switched around with this post. I had to correct it manually.


*Comment on the apparent mis-quoting.*
If you look back up the thread, there is a Brioche post in which one of the quote tags is not recognised (part of the end-quote tag went blue).

ChristineBrinn quoted that post, and the result is to make it look as if she's quoting you, not Brioche.  Her post starts with a {quote=brioche} that doesn't have a matching end quote.

*Comment on the topic.*
Indeed I am from Northern Ireland (maxiogee and I share the island between us in total amicability) - thus localising my experience of brung and brang.

As he says, we used brung for fun, and we'd still use it for fun.  I really don't know if anyone uses it seriously.  I've never heard brang.

*Off-topic comment.*
I didn't mean to sound sensitive - though it is usually more obvious than that if I'm feeling irritated   It was more a case of posting at 2:30am and not being careful enough with the tone of the post.


----------



## You little ripper!

> *Comment on the apparent mis-quoting.
> If you look back up the thread, there is a Brioche post in which one of the quote tags is not recognised (part of the end-quote tag went blue).
> 
> ChristineBrinn quoted that post, and the result is to make it look as if she's quoting you, not Brioche. Her post starts with a {quote=brioche} that doesn't have a matching end quote.
> *


There was something wrong with the program last night because the same thing happened to me when I tried to put Christine's quote in my post. It swapped the names around. I had to manually change them. The problems seems to have been corrected now.


----------



## AlonYo

I actually find the use of "brang" to be quite pleasant.  "Brung" sounds very strange to me, yet for some reason, when I hear "brang" I kind of enjoy it.  I would like to start using it myself, at least in common speech.  If it feels okay, then why not?  Of course, "brought" seems more formal and educated, but frankly that takes too much out of me to say, and if "brang" feels easier and more natural, I will say it... it's my language!  Of course one must watch who he or she says it around ("around whom he or she says it?"... psh, that's just silly and circumlocutory), but otherwise who cares?  I think it's valid to use "brang" in analogy with "ring, rang, etc."  I wouldn't say "ring, rought, rought" but that's an irregular form... "ring, rang, rung" is a regular form, so why not allow "bring" to line up with it?


----------



## Orange Blossom

Okay folks, I've heard _bring_, _brang_, and _brung_ used in proper syntactic use by my father who has a J.D., almost a Ph.D, and studied 4 languages besides English.  But guess what?  He was just having fun!  But he has this fun in regular speech at home with all kinds of words.  Because of this fun, it was shortly before my thirty-threeth birthday that I learned the "correct" past tense of _squeeze_ was _squeezed_ not _squoze_.

squeeze, squoze, squozen

I must say _squeezed_ sounds just plain 'wrong' to me, even though I've learned it's 'right'.

Orange Blossom


----------



## panjandrum

The dialect version is bring, brung, brung - around here.  Brang isn't used.  This is not really surprising because it goes with ring, rung, rung; do, done, done; and go, went, went.


----------



## mplsray

panjandrum said:


> You have got to be joking
> I have never heard brang.
> Children sometimes say brung as both past tense and participle, but usually have grown out of it by the age of four.


 
I don't recall having heard people using _brang_ either, but I'm sure that it's used in American English because it is an entry in _Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged,_ identified as a "_substand past of_ BRING."

The label _substand_ is discussed in the introductory pages of the dictionary:



> *8.2.2* The stylistic label _substand_ for "substandard" indicates status conforming to a pattern of linguistic usage that exists throughout the American language community but differs in choice of word or form from that of the prestige group in that community.


----------



## panjandrum

Brang isn't in the OED. Brung is - as a dialect form of the past tense and participle of bring. I wonder why I didn't look that up last year when this thread began (funny it should re-surface so close to its birthday).

The AE brang could be from a differently-formed dialect structure - perhaps a structure that is more influenced by education than the bring, brung, brung version?


----------



## timpeac

panjandrum said:


> Brang isn't in the OED. Brung is - as a dialect form of the past tense and participle of bring. I wonder why I didn't look that up last year when this thread began (funny it should re-surface so close to its birthday).
> 
> The AE brang could be from a differently-formed dialect structure - perhaps a structure that is more influenced by education than the bring, brung, brung version?


Is it perhaps a New York dialect? The reason I wonder that is that I find the Neil Diamond song "play me" absolutely beautiful in every respect other than the way he uses "brang" to make a rhyme with "rang" and "sprang". But now I wonder if I've been unfair and this is just his dialect rather than laziness to find a better rhyme.


----------



## mplsray

panjandrum said:


> Brang isn't in the OED. Brung is - as a dialect form of the past tense and participle of bring. I wonder why I didn't look that up last year when this thread began (funny it should re-surface so close to its birthday).
> 
> The AE brang could be from a differently-formed dialect structure - perhaps a structure that is more influenced by education than the bring, brung, brung version?


 
There are many pages which mention _brang_ as a past tense of _bring,_ but as a children's coinage. I doubt that Webster's Third would have included it in that usage, just as they would not have included _mans_ for _men._

Looking for _brang_ in actual dialectal use is complicated by the fact that _brang_ is used as a pronunciation spelling for representing dialects in which [æ] replaces [I] in such words as _sing_ and _thing_ (such as in some Texas dialects).

However, I managed to find two examples of _brang_ being used in a past tense of _bring._ When I did a Google search for 

brang "appalachian dialect"

(follow this link), I got hits for a page by Kathleen Mullins Dingus, who cites _brang_ for _brought_ in her page on Mountain Talk.

The other link was to an archived article which one must pay to read, "The Grammar of the Ozark Dialect" by Vance Randolph, _American_ _Speech,_ Vol. 3, No. 1 (October 1927) pages 1-11. However, the little information displayed by Google shows 

bring brang, brung brung buy boughten boughten

which leads me to think that the author was referring to two conjugations of bring: _bring, brang, brung_ and _bring, brung, brung._ So it appears that the OED missed this cite from 1927. (It would not, of course, have appeared in the first edition, but if the editors of the OED had caught it, they could have put it in the latest edition).


----------



## Orange Blossom

panjandrum said:


> The dialect version is bring, brung, brung - around here.  Brang isn't used.  This is not really surprising because it goes with *ring, rung, rung*; do, done, done; and go, went, went.



We have *ring, rang, rung*.

We _rang_ the bells during communion.

The bells were _rung _during communion.

By the way, my dad has jokingly used "branged" also.  I _branged_ in the groceries.

Branged, of course would be a double past tense form like _wented_. 

Orange Blossom


----------



## panjandrum

You tempt me.
Once upon a time the local newspaper would give examples of strange local usage.  This included strange definitions.  On one memorable occasion, they offered the following definition:
goad - - - - - to went.


----------



## Orange Blossom

panjandrum said:


> You tempt me.
> Once upon a time the local newspaper would give examples of strange local usage.  This included strange definitions.  On one memorable occasion, they offered the following definition:
> go*a*d - - - - - to went.



Oh, that's hilarious, but - pardon me - wouldn't that be go*e*d?  

Hmm.  In actual usage, other than my dad playing games, he has heard _brung_ used but never _brang_.

Orange Blossom


----------



## brad243

Yesterday someone lamented the fact that her 12 year old grand-daughter and many of her friends use brang, "I brang my whatever...", I am told they use it often, perhaps almost exclusively instead of brought.  This is in an outer suburb of Melbourne, not recent migrant background.

Today I spoke with a 95 year old, born in Melbourne, she said she heard brang and brung a lot when she was young, used by older people, "ever since there's been a reasonable education system people don't say that any more."


----------



## brad243

my research on brang and brung led me to this forum.

I see it works like this:

I think it works this way:

bring, brang, brung

I will bring, I brang, I have brung

like:

sing, sang, sung

I can sing, I sang, I have sung

ring, rang, rung

I will ring the bell, I rang the bell, I have rung the bell

**
officially:

I will bring, I brought, I have brought.  The brought doesn't change, so the brang/brung system is obviously superior and more consistent.


----------



## quickie

panjandrum said:


> You tempt me.
> Once upon a time the local newspaper would give examples of strange local usage.  This included strange definitions.  On one memorable occasion, they offered the following definition:
> goad - - - - - to went.



I can see how "to went" might goad some people here.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

This isn't a case where the vigorous simple past has just been weakened, as happened to several verbs in the nineteenth century. In paras 30 and 31 of this commentary on a bit of Wordsworth's Prelude you see the poet saying clomb where we would say climbed.

But brought has almost as vigorous an Anglo-Saxon ring as brung.

And neither brang, nor brung are found in Shakespeare, who uses brought 266 times in the poems and plays. Chaucer doesn't use brang or brung either, and uses brought twice in the Canterbury Tales and, surprisingly, 18 times in Troilius and Criseyde.

I find it hard to escape the conclusion of many others that this is an uneducated modern variant.


----------



## Spectre scolaire

Reading this thread I am a bit surprised – in a language forum! – to see so much “prescriptive behaviour”. The first posting relating _brang_ to the very normal phenomenon of _language development_ – whether you like such a thing to happen to your own language or not - is #*35*:




mplsray said:


> I don't recall having heard people using _brang_ either, but I'm sure that it's used in American English because it is an entry in _Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged,_ identified as a "_substand past of_ BRING."
> 
> The label _substand_ is discussed in the introductory pages of the dictionary:
> 
> *8.2.2* The stylistic label _substand_ for "substandard" indicates status conforming to a pattern of linguistic usage that exists throughout the American language community but differs in choice of word or form from that of the prestige group in that community.


 _Orange Blossom_(#39) is hinting at the logical explanation of this “uneducated” (#7) verbal form which, according to the same forero, --



			
				CAMullen said:
			
		

> I haven't heard [...] in decades, but bear in mind that back then, there were people who didn't listen regularly to radio, let alone television, [...]


 _mplsray_(#38) is then reviewing actual usage and _brad243_ (#43) is referring to the parallel verbal patterns of _sing_ and _ring_ – but nobody is naming the beast...

Should we call it *system pressure*?

If a change occurs in a dialect or in sub-standard language it is – or rather _was _(especially before the age of television  ) – very much a coincidence whether this change will be established in the system. One of the many reasons for change to occur in the first place is the great disparity of the existing system itself. In English we find verbs like:

drink – drank – drunk
ring – rang – rung
sing – sang - sung
stink – stank – stunk

-- and the more “regular” type of conjugation like:

call – called, hear – heard, say – said

--even if the very term “regular” is somehow strange because the _drink_ type represents a characterictic linguistic feature of all Germanic languages – as much as _drink_ing has always been a cherished behaviour and indeed, quite an _institution_, among its early speakers.

At the end of the day we are all more or less favouring puristic language – simply because we all read. To _hear_ the form brang is one thing – to see it written is something very different. Even linguists will be shocked – or perhaps “only” extremely amused – if they should happen to see such a form in, say, J.K. Rowling. 

As far as Neil Diamond is concerned – see the link provided by _timpeac_(#16)



> Song, she sang to me, song she brang to me,
> Words that rang in me, rhyme that sprang from me warmed the night.
> And what was right became me.
> You are the sun, I am the moon,
> You are the words, I am the tune, play me.


 -- I’d call this usage an _artistic licence_. 
 ​


----------



## cuchuflete

_Moderator note:  The thread topic is repeated below, for those who have forgotten, or never read the first page of long threads with entrancing titles.  Posts that address the thread topic are welcomed here.  Those that do not will be _brung_ before a magistrate and sentenced to invisibility.

_


> I would like to know who of you uses "brang" and "brung" (past tense and past participle of *bring*) instead of _brought_.
> (Even if it's only in spoken, and not in written English)
> 
> Who of you uses "brought" but would not regard "bring" and "brung" to be wrong?!
> Who of you only uses "brought" and would say "brang" and "brung" are wrong?!


----------



## ewie

Personally ... 99% of the time I'd use _bring>brought>brought_.  The other 1% of the time ... for comic effect ... I might use _brung _or _brang_ or _brong, bringed, broughted ..._
I wouldn't call them exactly 'wrong' ... more 'not very correct'.
I'm tending toward the position of AlonYo (post #32), though



AlonYo said:


> I actually find the use of "brang" to be quite pleasant. "Brung" sounds very strange to me, yet for some reason, when I hear "brang" I kind of enjoy it. I would like to start using it myself, at least in common speech. If it feels okay, then why not?


 
_Brang_ and _brung_ have a nice ring (or rang or rung) to them


----------



## emmalee

I use brought. But, my parents have used brang and brung on occasion. However, if I were to hear anyone else use these I would do a double-take. 
I like brought the best


----------



## panjandrum

It seems timely to introduce a small "duty of care" point.

As MrMagoo made clear in post #1, the conventional past tense and participle is *brought*.

No doubt aware that brang and brung occur with varying popularity in various places and contexts, MrMagoo asked for views on such usage and such views have been honestly offered.

None of this alters the fact that in a formal context, and in particular in an examination, it would be unwise to use *brang *or *brung*.


----------



## timpeac

panjandrum said:


> None of this alters the fact that in a formal context, and in particular in an examination, it would be unwise to use *brang *or *brung*.


And also, even in an informal situation you could surprise or amuse those you are speaking to since it seems clear that for some people they have never heard anyone use "brang" and they would probably assume it was a genuine mistake. The use of "brang" in Neil Diamond's song mentioned above is the only time I can recall hearing it myself.


----------



## 0123OK

My daughter and I were wondering if brung was a word because we both use it. We also have both used brang. Searching for the answer brought us to this thread. Mark us down as two contemporary, mass media exposed, big readers that use brang and brung. We'll try to correct it now.

I'm college educated and she is top of her 5th grade class though neither of us are english linguists. We're both Arizona natives so maybe it is a southern or western thing.

As far as the original question, when using brung or brang, I think I have a thought not unusual to me - "I may not be using english correctly here"


----------



## LadyDungeness

0123OK said:


> We'll try to _*correct *_it now.



Why try to "_*correct*_" it?  As you say, your use of *brung *may be part of a regional Arizona variety.  Everybody understands you, right?  So why try to talk like the knuckle-rappers want you to?  

What about in writing--do you use *brung *there?  Written English is slower to adopt new forms, and my guess is that *brung *in written English would stand out as an oddity.  I'd suggest not using it in writing.  

Listen to other Arizonans? Arizonians? around you for a few weeks -- do they use *brung*?  Do NOT ask them what they use, because the focus on the word form itself can change their responses.  Instead, just listen; post back when your research is done!  

Lady Dungeness


----------



## JamesM

LadyDungeness said:


> Why try to "_*correct*_" it? As you say, your use of *brung *may be part of a regional Arizona variety. Everybody understands you, right? So why try to talk like the knuckle-rappers want you to?


 
This is assuming that she only speaks to other Arizona natives, LD.  In this interconnected world today, how likely is that? 

Although it's fine for casual speech, I certainly wouldn't want to pop out with it in a job interview, a customer service call at work, or a business presentation.

You speak as if it would not be unusual in any spoken setting.  I strongly disagree.


----------



## LadyDungeness

You have a good point.  I agree that *brung *should not be used in formal speech.  

Do you really not understand what *brung *means?

Do you mean to suggest also that all English speakers should use only those words and phrases that every other English speaker believes is correct?  If this is your intent, I'm afraid you're fighting a losing battle -- there are many varieties of English, and always will be.  Perhaps even your own preferred variety of English has words and phrases that other native English speakers might not be used to.  

Lady Dungeness


----------



## Thomas Tompion

LadyDungeness said:


> You have a good point. I agree that *brung *should not be used in formal speech.
> 
> Do you really not understand what *brung *means?
> 
> Do you mean to suggest also that all English speakers should use only those words and phrases that every other English speaker believes is correct? If this is your intent, I'm afraid you're fighting a losing battle -- there are many varieties of English, and always will be. Perhaps even your own preferred variety of English has words and phrases that other native English speakers might not be used to.
> 
> Lady Dungeness


But you sound as though you are trying to knuckle-rap us into using the word.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

LadyDungeness said:


> Do you really not understand what *brung *means?


 
Do you really not understand all the other things, over and besides the meaning of "bring" in the past tense, that the use of "brung" can mean to the hearer?

Whether you like it or not (and all the indignant huffing in the world on your part will not change it), there are millions of people who, upon hearing a speaker used "brung" as a past tense for "bring", will immediately have a lower estimation of that person's education, and possibly of the person's abilities.  Now, if one wants to strike a blow for perfect freedom of expression everywhere at all times, one can continue to say "brung" without compromise, just as one can say "he ain't", or use "gooder" as the comparative form of "good".  Nevertheless, such a person should not be too surprised when this free-spirited usage contributes adversely to a job interview or in a letter of application sent by the user.

And to get back to the topic of the thread, I never use _brang_ or brung _naturally _and without thinking about it, but only deliberately and for comic effect.


----------



## LadyDungeness

> there are millions of people who, upon hearing a speaker used "brung" as a past tense for "bring", will immediately have a lower estimation of that person's education, and possibly of the person's abilities.



Please re-read my posts.  I support the use of _brung _in spoken English; The user should know that _brung _belongs to a variety of English and is not accepted as correct across all varieties; I do not support using _brung _in formal speech or in writing.  

I do not support the imputation of "being uneducated" to the speaker.  I do support explaining the meaning of words, along with their nuances and what they convey in different contexts.  

I'm sorry if you want to label certain language as "uneducated".  If the language is used by native speakers, then it is in fact language, and warrants a contextual explanation instead of a pejorative.

Lady Dungeness


----------



## JamesM

LadyDungeness said:


> You have a good point. I agree that *brung *should not be used in formal speech.
> 
> Do you really not understand what *brung *means?


 
Absolutely, just as I understand "gotted", "heared", "axed (for asked)" and many other variations. Did I say I didn't?



> Do you mean to suggest also that all English speakers should use only those words and phrases that every other English speaker believes is correct?


 
Wow! That's quite a leap. Where you got this interpretation from what I said is beyond me. What a strange conclusion to draw from what I said.


----------



## LadyDungeness

Please explain, then:  



> ME:  Everybody understands you, right?
> YOU: This is assuming that she only speaks to other Arizona natives.





> I understand "gotted", "heared", "axed (for asked)"?



I don't think you've ever heard _gotted _from a native English speaker.  _getted _from a child, perhaps, but not _gotted_.  

heared -- also sounds like a child overgeneralizing the past tense ending to all verbs

aksed -- this pronunciation was once standard in an earlier form of English.  It is again standard in some dialects of English.  And no, I will never correct anybody who choses that pronunciation.  

If you do some digging, you'll find that /sk/  and /ks/  have an uncanny habit of changing places.  

Lady Dungeness


----------



## panjandrum

This thread has been round the bring, brang, brung loop several times.

It is now in danger of wandering off into a general discussion on various atypical usages.  That would be absolutely dreadful, so I have closed the thread.

I think an intelligent reader will be able to glean from the thread, as it stands, a useful perspective on bring, brang, brung.

So, with thanks to MrMagoo, who first bringed this topic to our attention, AlonYo who dugged it up in March last year, and brad243, who brunged it to the fore this time, I think it's time to put it away for a while.

Future generations wishing to resurrect the topic are welcome to propose so to the moderators of the time.


----------

