Are the following sentences valid:
It didn't used to happen.
It didn't used to have been there.
And if so, what tenses are they?
Asked
Active
Viewed 3,009 times
3
-
Possible duplicate of What's the negation of “I used to be”? Surely not “I didn't used to be”? – RegDwigнt Jun 03 '11 at 09:25
2 Answers
5
It should be "use", because "did" already makes it past tense, so "-d" is not needed.
"didn't use" is simple past, and "to have been" is an infinitive with the verb a past perfect.
This graph shows that only recently has "didn't used to" rise in use. This is also characterized with the rise of usage and popularity with many informal and actually incorrect English.
Thursagen
- 41,919
-
-
-
See my answer below. Both forms are used informally everywhere you look. In fact, "didn't used to" is even more common than "didn't use to" is. – Robusto Jun 03 '11 at 10:14
-
That may be so, sir, but I didn't say they were wrong, just not needed. – Thursagen Jun 03 '11 at 10:17
-
You said "should be 'use'"; saying one is "right" is tantamount to saying the other is "wrong". Either words mean something or they don't. – Robusto Jun 03 '11 at 10:19
-
1+1 for this answer, "didn't used to" is so wrong it can't get any wronger. – Frantisek Jun 03 '11 at 11:07
-
I conjecture that the rise of "didn't used to" is because "use to" (as opposed to "used to") ceased to be current. – Colin Fine Jun 03 '11 at 14:09
-
I agree with @Third Idiot. Nothing wrong with plain old weren't. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '11 at 15:50
-
@Robusto, @Colin, actually, I’d say it’s because didn’t use to is hard to use in a real sentence. It sounds okay on its own, but it does not fit in an actual sentence; you would have to insert an “it” or something: didn’t use it* to…*. – Synetech Jun 03 '11 at 16:13
2
"Didn't used to ..." is a colloquialism (i.e. informal) combining "didn't" and "used to" and both are past tense, like a double negative. And like a double negative, it's not wrong, just not formal. In fact both forms are common and informal.
See http://thestar.com.my/english/story.asp?file=/2007/11/9/lifefocus/19384883&sec=lifefocus
It is used quite often by many people, including journalists:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/102182784.html
http://www.stuhenderson.com/21RACFS.pdf
By the way, although Google NGrams can be misused, I think a direct comparison here using that tool is informative here.
It shows that both terms are used and that "didn't used to" has gained ascendancy over the latter half of the 20th century.
Robusto
- 151,571
-
Why didn't you search earlier? I searched from 1750, and "didn't used to" was shown up above. Because of the recent rise of informal speech, it doesn't mean "didn't used to" is necessarily correct. – Thursagen Jun 03 '11 at 10:24
-
Thank you. What about "didn't used to have been"? When did that come into being, and what tense would you call that? – Urbycoz Jun 03 '11 at 10:38
-
@Urbycoz: Now there I would draw the line. Although you may find instances of that usage, the plain infinitival form is more what you hear, probably because both expressions derive from "used" + infinitive (used to dance, used to be, used to laugh [about] and so on). – Robusto Jun 03 '11 at 11:00
-
It's certainly true NGrams can mislead, but I suggest this link backs up my feeling that both variations are somewhat archaic, and falling into disuse following their Victorian heyday... http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/graph?content=used+to+have+been%2Cuse+to+have+been&year_start=1700&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=10 – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '11 at 15:48