You was?

[Vjeko]

Hello!

Here I am again with a question.

I heard yesterday something strange in some american film.
It was an actor saying something like: "You was doing...."

How is it possible to say 'you was' and not 'you were'; in this case in a
use of Past Continuous?

Is it some kind of slang or what:)?

Thnx in advance for an answer.

Vjeko.
:)from Croatia:=)

[Einde O'Callaghan]

Post by Vjeko
Hello!
Here I am again with a question.
I heard yesterday something strange in some american film.
It was an actor saying something like: "You was doing...."
How is it possible to say 'you was' and not 'you were'; in this case in
a use of Past Continuous?
Is it some kind of slang or what:)?

It's non-standard grammar - I suppose you could call it dialect. It
could also indicate that the character speaking was relatively
uneducated and from the working or farming class.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

[J***@gmail.com]

Post by Vjeko
Hello!
Here I am again with a question.
I heard yesterday something strange in some american film.
It was an actor saying something like: "You was doing...."
How is it possible to say 'you was' and not 'you were'; in this case in a
use of Past Continuous?
Is it some kind of slang or what:)?
Thnx in advance for an answer.
Vjeko.
:)from Croatia:=)

There is one point that might help here in understanding WHY this
uneducated dialogue exists and would be included in a movie as a
marker of uneducated/colloquial speech.

Have you ever wondered precisely why "you" is both the singular and
plural form of the second person? Oddly enough, the original forms of
English second person singular pronouns (thee, thy, thou (among
others)) have more or less disappeared from all varieties of the
modern language.

In quite a few major regional languages only plural second person
person forms are used in formal speech (Spanish - vosotros, French -
vous). You might say that English language and culture has made such a
study of formality that we use the plural to address even our closest
friends. This is more than a bit glib, however, and does not go to the
root of the problem.

It may sound strange, Vjeko, but as you work through English and learn
more and more, I think you'll find that instead of being able to
substitute a plural second-person pronoun for a singular one to turn a
phrase from informal to formal, you'll have to learn and use an entire
series of phrases in order to be able to successfully manage what's
typically called "register transfer." This has come to be regarded as
one of the most troubling problems for students at advanced levels of
study.

Take it to the next level and think about the phenomenon of globalism
in this context, and you'll realize that this seemingly minor language
issue might very well have a good deal to do with how native speakers
of English manage to communicate successfully at different levels of
formality, while non-native speakers find themselves somehow falling
short when it comes to doing things like writing successfully for
publication, communicating effectively through e-mail, or handling
delicate negotiations, three skills that play significant roles in
practically every professional, high-paying position in the English-
speaking world.

--James Karaway