1
   

used not to

 
 
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 05:10 am
I used not to play football.

Is there any real grammatical justification for that form?

Many thanks.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 470 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 05:38 am
The verb " to use to" to mean "to be in the habit of" (doing something) is pefectly grammatical. Usually only found in the past tense nowadays. It is the origin of the noun "usage", a very topical word for you!

The placing of "not" after the verb is a survival of earlier practice or usage.

I saw not the sun for six days.
I love not rainy days.
I used not to sing ere I met Mary.

("ere" is poetical for "before")
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 07:19 am
I play football now. I used not to play football, Is one justification

I think its poor grammar but the term is used in that form sometimes. Another British/American difference.

"I didn't play football" is much better.

I bought a used car. I used a knife.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 08:31 am
dadpad wrote:
I think its poor grammar but the term is used in that form sometimes.


It's perfectly good grammar. "Use" in the sense "be accustomed" or "make it a practice" is an ordinary verb that happens, for the time being, to not be used in some of its tenses. The unused tenses are not dead: they are only dormant.

Note Evelyn Waugh's "You used not to have a moustache, used you?" (Quoted in I. C. B. Dear's Oxford English), where "used" is used both separated from "to" and completely without "to".

I would be quite comfortable with saying

When I retire, I will use often -- especially on
weekdays -- to go to the park. Will you so use?
I suppose there will be others so using. I don't
use to go to the park on weekends; it's too
crowded.

I won't say it, of course, because it's temporarily out of fashion, but if someone says it to me, I will accept it as normal English.
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 08:36 am
I would say:
I used to not play football, now I do. (note position of "not")
I used to play football, now I don't.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 09:33 am
Yes, "used not to" is stilted, archaic, and clumsy. It's actual English but nobody really speaks that way anymore.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 10:54 am
username wrote:
I would say:
I used to not play football, now I do. (note position of "not")


I note the wrong position of "not" in that sentence. Despite what various North Americans say, "used not" is perfectly good standard UK English. I am prepared to assert that, although obviously unfamiliar to North Americans, it is perfectly good US English as well.

"I used to not play football" is only grammatical if you wish to say "I was in the habit of avoiding playing football".

Quote:
I used to play football, now I don't.


But that is correct.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Aug, 2007 10:58 am
Mame wrote:
Yes, "used not to" is stilted, archaic, and clumsy. It's actual English but nobody really speaks that way anymore.


It's not ungrammatical and it's not wrong either. As for the stilted thing, I'd rather speak properly than sound like a hayseed.

Used not" is actually very common and normal in many countries. It's the way we speak in Britain. Thanks for insulting a whole country. I daresay the Australians, South Africans, New Zealanders, will be glad to hear that they are stilted, archaic and clumsy too.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
  1. Forums
  2. » used not to
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 12:11:13