# I've forgot what I wanted to say



## mm_matt

¿cómo lo traduciría en español " I've forgot what I wanted to say "?
 Apreciaría su ayuda 
Gracias


----------



## Maruja14

He olvidado lo que quería decir.

Haz tú algún intento, amigo, son las reglas.


----------



## thaliafan

He olvidado lo que quería decir


----------



## coquita

mm_matt said:
			
		

> ¿cómo lo traduciría en español " I've forgot what I wanted to say "?
> Apreciaría su ayuda
> Gracias


 
No sería "I've *forgotten*"?
Saludos


----------



## thaliafan

coquita said:
			
		

> No sería "I've *forgotten*"?
> Saludos


 
Sabemos, pero no queremos corregir su primera lengua!


----------



## mm_matt

Si, seria " I've forgotten "
Lo siento
por favor, corregir los errores


----------



## LucíayMiguel

"Se me ha olvidado lo que quería decir"

Que mm matt no lo haya escrito correctamente en su lengua, no quiere decir que no lo señalemos. Sin duda ha sido un lapsus por su parte, ¿no? lo importante es ayudar.


----------



## dulo

De hecho, también se acepta "forgot" (además de "forgotten") como participio del verbo "to forget".


----------



## Maruja14

dulo said:
			
		

> De hecho, también se acepta "forgot" (además de "forgotten") como participio del verbo "to forget".


 
¡Qué curioso! A mí no me había sonado mal "forgot", pero, claro, es difícil que a mí me suene mal algo en inglés. 

De todos modos, en el colegio nos suspendían por este tipo de cosas. 

No sé si lo seguirán haciendo.


----------



## LucíayMiguel

Maruja14 said:
			
		

> He olvidado lo que quería decir.
> 
> Haz tú algún intento, amigo, son las reglas.


 
There's no need to be so patronizing, Maruja. Not all of us are perfect!
It's a good thing that you have changed your tone in the second thread. The forum calls for being clear, respectful and helpful, not for putting each other down at the first chance.

With all my respects, I hope you get what I mean.

saludos


----------



## helenkr

Strictly speaking "forgot" in that sentence is grammatically incorrect, however English is an adaptable, felxible language (the rules change regularly) so since so many people now say "forgot" it is now considered to be equally correct. 

Another example, is with "sat". People often say "she was sat in the corner" when more the grammatically accurate sentence would be "she was seated in the corner". This is because, unlike the Spanish who have the royal acadamy for the language, there is no institution which makes the grammatical rules here in the UK- our language changes with the times and with usage, and there are not strict rules as to what is correct and incorrect.

Hope that helps.


----------



## dulo

helenkr said:
			
		

> Strictly speaking "forgot" in that sentence is grammatically incorrect,


Según el diccionario de Oxford:

*FORGOT: past (& US past participle) of forget*

Y el American Heritage Dictionary:

*FORGOT: Past tense and a past participle of forget*

En inglés británico usamos "got" (en vez de "gotten") como participio de "to get", y eso tampoco es gramaticalmente incorrecto...


----------



## helenkr

That is just what I was saying- the language has evolved. If words are used often enough they become "correct" although strictly speaking they are not. Ask any English language professor and they will tell you the same. That is why using "forgot" would be marked incorrectin an English exam, because according to the stricter rules of the English Language it is incorrect, even though it has been accepted in most situations (exceptions being Acts of Parliament, writs, wills and the like).

Also, "got" is correct English, whilse "gotten" in an Americanism which is not commonly accepted in the English of Britain.


----------



## cityoflight

But even though a lot of people use it, it's still incorrect to say 'I've forgot' (no disparagement intended, mm_matt!) as it should be 'I forgot', or 'I've forgotten. People in Norfolk use 'fat' as a past participle of 'to fit', which nobody except Norfolkians would understand!


----------



## Txiri

LucíayMiguel said:
			
		

> There's no need to be so patronizing, Maruja. Not all of us are perfect!
> It's a good thing that you have changed your tone in the second thread. The forum calls for being clear, respectful and helpful, not for putting each other down at the first chance.
> 
> With all my respects, I hope you get what I mean.
> 
> saludos


 
It´s not patronizing to remind a poster of the rules.  

I read her phrase "haz tu intento, amigo ..." as a very friendly reminder.   Could you explain what you consider to be a "put down" there?


----------



## Jcvega

*¿cómo lo traduciría en español " I've forgot what I wanted to say "?
Apreciaría su ayuda 
Gracias*

Eres muy educado al preguntar asi,
Mira, tu puedes decir

Se me ha olvidado lo que queria decir.
si estas en una conversación telefónica.
oh.. olvide lo que queria decir, en mi pais se dice,
no recuerdo lo que queria decir, 

Pero lo que quieras decir, como eres educado, la gente te responderá con educación y será paciente y te entendera, ten eso por seguro!!!

cuando necesites mi ayuda, cuenta conmigo. Juan


----------



## LucíayMiguel

Txiri said:
			
		

> It´s not patronizing to remind a poster of the rules.
> 
> I read her phrase "haz tu intento, amigo ..." as a very friendly reminder. Could you explain what you consider to be a "put down" there?


 
Sorry to contradict you, Txiri, but Maruja literally wrote "haz tú algún intento", and for a native speaker that "tú" emphasizes the idea that she thinks the other person is not trying.
I don't want to insist on this, but I'm a native speaker and read between lines. Her answer was patronizing and the reaction was not positive (that's why she changed her tone the second time), not the fact that she wanted to remind the other person of the rules. We do not need to address each other as if we were little children, and I think you may understand what I mean.
That's why I think her overall tone was a bit derrogative, nothing more, nothing less. To me it sounds more like a personal vendetta? Ha, ha...


----------



## dulo

cityoflight said:
			
		

> But even though a lot of people use it, it's still incorrect to say 'I've forgot' (no disparagement intended, mm_matt!)


No, it's not incorrect. 
Check the OED, Merriam-Webster's, Cambridge Advanced Learner's, etc, and you'll see that they all list "forgot" as the past tense *OR *the past participle of "to forget".



			
				helenkr said:
			
		

> That is just what I was saying- the language has evolved. If words are used often enough they become "correct" although strictly speaking they are not.


Hmm, strange logic. Language evolves and what it evolves into becomes "correct" but still not "strictly speaking correct"? That doesn't make sense as it kind of contradicts the concept of evolution itself.



			
				helenkr said:
			
		

> Also, "got" is correct English, whilse "gotten" in an Americanism which is not commonly accepted in the English of Britain.


An "Americanism"? Firstly, Americans speak correct English too, and secondly, "gotten" is an archaic word in British English that is still used in American English. They didn't invent it just to annoy us.

If "*got*" (and not "*gotten*") is the only correct past participle for "to get", wouldn't it logically follow that "for*got*" and not ("for*gotten*") was the correct past participle for "to forget"?
Yes, it would... but as language isn't mathematics and doesn't evolve in a consistent manner, we no longer use "gotten" as a past participle (in BE), yet we do use "forgotten.
We also use "forgot" as a p.p. and that's why it's listed in all the major dictionaries.
Maybe "forgotten" will eventually become archaic/obsolete in BE, like "gotten" did, who knows...

To sum up: they are both correct. If you disagree with the OED and the other dictionaries, fine.
As mentioned, we don't have an ultimate authority in English like the RAE, but you shouldn't tell English learners "this is correct English and this isn't, and every English language professor would agree with me", when it simply isn't the case.


----------



## helenkr

well, excuse me for repeating what the oxford dictionary of word origins told me, and the lecturers at the University of Cambridge at a conference I attended. What I stated is what is taught in English Language degrees in this country's universities- it isn't just something I made up. I have been studying this, and I know what I am talking about. The person I was replying to said it was strange that they are told that to say "forgot" is incorrect, and I was explaining why that is- although it is an accepted term, grammatically speaking it is not correct. There is a differencce between being accepted and being correct. Yes, it is recognised by the dictionaries, but if you look at the full versions of the Oxford English Dictionary and read the footnotes then you will understand what I am talking about. 

Also, I didn't say that the Americans don't speak correct English. Perhaps, gotten was at some point used in British English, but again if you read a dictionary, you will see that it is listed as an Americanism (by the way, Americanism means a variation of British English, it doesn't imply that it is incorrect) which is why I stated that. It is rarely used in British English, but regularly used in American English. And I didn't suggest that it was used to be annoying. 

As for the evolution of language, you should know that it is different to the evolution of animals. If a term is commonly used, it becomes part of the language, in an informal sense. The reason why it is not "strictly speaking correct" is that it isn't accepted in a more formal sense. As I said, Acts of Parliament, other laws, wills, writs, and the like do not employ the aforementioned words because they are not correct in formal situations, even though they are in the dictionary. 

Kindly be more polite in future responses.


----------



## Maruja14

LucíayMiguel said:
			
		

> Sorry to contradict you, Txiri, but Maruja literally wrote "haz tú algún intento", and for a native speaker that "tú" emphasizes the idea that she thinks the other person is not trying.
> I don't want to insist on this, but I'm a native speaker and read between lines. Her answer was patronizing and the reaction was not positive (that's why she changed her tone the second time), not the fact that she wanted to remind the other person of the rules. We do not need to address each other as if we were little children, and I think you may understand what I mean.
> That's why I think her overall tone was a bit derrogative, nothing more, nothing less. To me it sounds more like a personal vendetta? Ha, ha...


 
Pues lamento contradecirte a ti. Lo siento no había visto estas respuestas antes.

Me sorprende que seas española/español, porque la frase no está escrita en mal tono, ni me parece que se lo pueda parecer a nadie. Tal vez tú seas muy sensible.

Tampoco entiendo que en un hilo que está desde el principio en español me contestes en inglés, la verdad. A lo mejor yo no lo entiendo.

Txiri me conoce bien y ha entendido perfectamente el sentido de mi frase, aunque sea angloparlante. Lo que espero es que mm_matt lo haya entendido así también.

Mm_matt no quería parecer grosera, ya lo sabes. Mi frase es amistosa completamente, como dice Txiri. 

Además, en contra de mi costumbre (no me gusta romper las reglas) di una contestación:

*He olvidado lo que quería decir.*

Si no la hubiese dado, o lo hubiese hecho mal, entendería que alguien se molestase.

En el segundo post no he cambiado el tono, es el habitual que suelo utilizar, lo mismo que en el primero.

Un saludo.


----------



## LucíayMiguel

Maruja14 said:
			
		

> Pues lamento contradecirte a ti. Lo siento no había visto estas respuestas antes.
> 
> Me sorprende que seas española/español, porque la frase no está escrita en mal tono, ni me parece que se lo pueda parecer a nadie. Tal vez tú seas muy sensible.
> 
> Tampoco entiendo que en un hilo que está desde el principio en español me contestes en inglés, la verdad. A lo mejor yo no lo entiendo.
> 
> Txiri me conoce bien y ha entendido perfectamente el sentido de mi frase, aunque sea angloparlante. Lo que espero es que mm_matt lo haya entendido así también.
> 
> Mm_matt no quería parecer grosera, ya lo sabes. Mi frase es amistosa completamente, como dice Txiri.
> 
> Además, en contra de mi costumbre (no me gusta romper las reglas) di una contestación:
> 
> *He olvidado lo que quería decir.*
> 
> Si no la hubiese dado, o lo hubiese hecho mal, entendería que alguien se molestase.
> 
> En el segundo post no he cambiado el tono, es el habitual que suelo utilizar, lo mismo que en el primero.
> 
> Un saludo.


 
Hola Maruja,

En primer lugar, creo que no he sido la única que ha contestado en inglés; y si lo he hecho ha sido sin darme cuenta. But that was not the point.
Tal vez haya interpretado mal el comentario que sigue a tu primera contestación, y si es así, me disculpo, y me alegro de haberme equivocado. De todos modos, no está de más pensar en estas cosas de vez en cuando.
Firmemos la paz. Te envío saludo desde Madrid,

LyM


----------



## dulo

helenkr said:
			
		

> Strictly speaking "forgot" in that sentence is grammatically incorrect, however English is an adaptable, felxible language (the rules change regularly) so since so many people now say "forgot" it is now considered to be equally correct


*Romeo and Juliet, original text:*

*"With Rosaline, my ghostly Father? No. *
*I have forgot that name and that name's woe."*

*It would seem that "forgot" as a past participle has been around for some time...*

*Yes, English is an **adaptable, flexible language, that's why a verb can have two past participles, both of which have been used in the past and continue to be used (another example: "to get").*




			
				helenkr said:
			
		

> "Our language changes with the times and with usage, and there are not strict rules as to what is correct and incorrect".


*My point exactly.*

*If "forgot" is not grammatically correct as a past participle then why do you think that "got" is correct, seeing as it is conjugated in exactly the same way, whereas the not-commonly-accepted (in BE) "gotten" is conjugated as (the supposedly only correct form) "forgotten"?*
*I think your quote above explains the reason why.*



			
				helenkr said:
			
		

> a term is commonly used, it becomes part of the language, in an informal sense. The reason why it is not "strictly speaking correct" is that it isn't accepted in a more formal sense. As I said, Acts of Parliament, other laws, wills, writs, and the like do not employ the aforementioned words because they are not correct in formal situations, even though they are in the dictionary


*You seem to be confusing what is considered grammatically correct/incorrect with the differences in fo**rmal/informal usage.*
*Colloquial usage doesn't equate to "not strictly speaking correct".*
*Much of the language used in Acts of Parliament, laws, wills, writs, etc, wouldn't even be intelligible for the average person (like me, who hasn't been to conferences at Cambridge, etc,) so it's hardly a good guide for teaching English learners (or anyone) about what is correct standard English.*



			
				helenkr said:
			
		

> ....excuse me for repeating what the oxford dictionary of word origins told me, and the lecturers at the University of Cambridge at a conference I attended
> *Which parts from these sources did you repeat?*
> 
> .....but if you look at the full versions of the Oxford English Dictionary and read the footnotes then you will understand what I am talking about.
> *I don't have the full version, but if you do then please quote the footnotes you're referring to.*
> 
> ...Also, I didn't say that the Americans don't speak correct English. Perhaps, gotten was at some point used in British English, yes it was but again if you read a dictionary, you will see that it is listed as an Americanism *No, it is listed as "archaic & US" in my Oxford Abridged dictionary. In an American dictionary it obviously wouldn't say anything about it being an "Americanism". *(by the way, Americanism means a variation of British English, it doesn't imply that it is incorrect) *If* *you say that "X is correct English", immediately followed by "Y is an Americanism", you appear to be implying that Y is less correct. This is not a Spanish/British English Only forum, as far as I know.*
> And I didn't suggest that it was used to be annoying. *My comment was sarcastic, perhaps?..*
> 
> 
> Kindly be more polite in future responses.


*Kindly be less patronising in future responses. *


----------



## Maruja14

LucíayMiguel, no te preocupes, yo no tengo problema alguno. Estoy en paz con todo el mundo, aunque discuta. No has sido la única que has hablado en inglés en este hilo, pero sí la primera.

Respecto a las correcciones varias que se han hecho en este hilo, todas son bienvenidas. Tanto las que se hacen a un nativo en su idioma como en el contrario.

Si hay algún error, el que lo vea debe corregirlo, así aprendemos todos, y todos nos esforzamos por escribir mejor, tanto en nuestra lengua como en la que no lo sea. Hay que darse cuenta que los que no dominamos un idioma siempre nos vamos a fiar de lo que escriba un nativo, por eso hay que ser cuidadoso.

Y, después de todo, veo que también los angloparlantes tenéis vuestras diferencias a ambos lados del charco.

Lo que no sé (aunque lo puedo imaginar) es qué significa "*patronising".*

Saludos a todos.


----------



## dulo

Maruja14 said:
			
		

> Lo que no sé (aunque lo puedo imaginar) es qué significa "patronising".
> 
> Saludos a todos.


Ah, en el diccionario de WordReference se deletrea con una "z" en vez de una "s" (otra diferencia transatlántica )...

*patronizing. adj pey condescendiente: he's got a patronizing way about him, adopta una actitud muy condescendiente*

Por favor, dile a helen que podemos seguir la discusión cuando vuelva de mis vacaciones (voy para España, olé...)
Gracias.


----------



## mariposita

All of this about forgot/forgotten, got/gotten is very interesting. And it is great to see that Shakespeare had his hand in the confusion. The same occurs with derivatives in other languages--for whatever reason one becomes more "regular" while the other remains irregular. This even happens with languages that have Academies (Spanish, for example, with its past participles corrompido/interrumpido/roto). Sometimes the irregular past participle sticks around as adjective... is this the case in British English? Would those who use forgot/got as past participles say:

Ill-gotten gain
Gone, but not forgotten


For Helen--
I'm sure you didn't mean to slight us, but most Americans don't think of our dialect as being a variant of British English. English is a global language and each country has it's own standard dialect and multitude of variants.


----------



## Moritzchen

Después de todo esto, *Me olvidé lo que quería decir!!!*


----------



## Maruja14

dulo said:
			
		

> Ah, en el diccionario de WordReference se deletrea con una "z" en vez de una "s" (otra diferencia transatlántica )...
> 
> *patronizing. adj pey condescendiente: he's got a patronizing way about him, adopta una actitud muy condescendiente*
> 
> Por favor, dile a helen que podemos seguir la discusión cuando vuelva de mis vacaciones (voy para España, olé...)
> Gracias.


 
Gracias Dulo, lo había buscado en el diccionario y no lo había encontrado. ¡Felices vacaciones! Yo me voy detrás de ti a España también. ¡Olé!  




			
				Moritzchen said:
			
		

> Después de todo esto, *Me olvidé lo que quería decir!!!*


 
A mi también se me olvidó de que iba el hilo. Voy a hacer un apunte porque esto me ha sonado un poco raro:

*b)* Como intransitivo pronominal, con sujeto de persona y un complemento introducido por _de,_ que expresa lo olvidado (_olvidarse de_ algo o alguien): _«Creía que ya me había olvidado de aquella mujer»_ (Quintero _Danza_ [Ven. 1991]); _«No se olvide de pedirle un aumento a su señor padre»_ (Bayly _Días_ [Perú 1996]); _«Me olvidé de que existía el Museo del Prado»_ (Galeano _Días_ [Ur. 1978]); _«Me olvido de dónde están las cosas»_ (Montero _Trenza_ [Cuba 1987]). Aunque ya desde antiguo es frecuente omitir la preposición _de_ cuando el complemento es una oración subordinada, especialmente en la lengua oral y coloquial (_Me olvidé que..., Me olvido dónde..._), se recomienda mantenerla en el habla esmerada.
_Diccionario panhispánico de dudas ©2005_
_Real Academia Española © Todos los derechos reservados_ 

No es incorrecto, pero a mí me gusta ponerle un "de", siempre tendemos a quitarlo. ​


----------



## helenkr

Please, I did not mean to suggest that American English is a varient, exactly. Just that it has a number of differences to British English, just as Spanish and South American Spanish differ, although the English is often to a lesser degree. 

Back to the subject of forgot/forgotten, got/gotten, they do both exist. I'm afraid the Shakespeare example isn't the best one possible because he regularly changed rules in order to make his lines have 10 syllables, or to fit in whichever poetic structure he was employing at that time. Whilst in Shakespearean times that word was used (there are other examples but I can't think of them off the top of my head), that particular structure practically disappeared from the English language and "forgotten" was favoured and considered to be correct. The same goes for got/gotten in many senses, although in phrases such as that previously mentioned "ill-gotten gains" it still has regular usage. 

As for the term, Americanism. I did not imply that this was incorrect English intentionally, but if you inferred that then I apologise. I do not consider American English to be any less correct than British English. I separated it because I have not studied American English so I do not feel at all qualified to comment much on it. That is why I said that ....is correct English (I meant to say that it was correct in British English, and I am sorry I did not clarify that), and that ....is an Americanism (I meant to explain that it isn't necessarily correct in British English, as for American English, I don't really know but I assume it is correct).

Acts of Parliament and so forth are deliberately written in accessable English so that the people the laws apply to can understand them. They are however, written formally and use structures and words which are accepted as being correct. I did not say that I was expecting the people here learning English to go and read an Act of Parliament, although I believe that if they were to do that then they would be able to understand it. By giving that example I was merely trying to explain that in formal English some things are not used, which may be why when they are learning English such words are considered incorrect. I know that in the school I did an exchange with in Spain, they are taught "standard English" which tends to reject things such as "gotten" and "I've forgot", because in a professional situation those words are not acceptable, even if they are so in everyday English. 

Most of what I have said here was taken from the notes I made. By repeating my sources, I was not intending to sound patronising, I just wanted to show you that there is some authority on what I am saying and that it isn't just my opinion. My own opinion would be that whilst "i have forgot" sounds strange to me, as does "gotten", I think they are still not incorrect because they are regularly used. However, since the opinions of those more educated than myself are perhaps more valuble since they have a higher authority on these matters than I do, I chose to repeat their opinions as opposed to my own.

I hope you have a lovely holiday.


----------



## Marta Barcelona

Estoy de acuerdo con LuciayMiguel. Sin mas comentarios.


----------



## lazarus1907

Marta Barcelona said:
			
		

> Estoy de acuerdo con LuciayMiguel. Sin mas comentarios.


Regla número 13 del foro:

13 . *Any information, translations and definitions posted in these forums must be accompanied by a reasonable attempt to verify accuracy.*


----------

