Wednesday, 20 October 2010

shinen, shined, shone

Gabe's excellent post on shined and shone prompted me to investigate the claim in the Huffington Post article:

Shine is one of those “strong verbs” that had an irregular past tense and past participle (shone) but later acquired a regular form ending in -ed as well.

If they mean that the past participle was shone first and then shined later, then no. A quick look in the OED tells me that shone only came to be used as the past participle in the second half of the 16th century. Before that the past participle was shined.

In fact, the verb has had three past participles.

sinen, from earlier *scinen - presumably this is the earliest past participle, compare the German past participle geschienen and Dutch geschenen:

Ðe leun ne stireð he nout of slepe Til ðe sunne haueð sinen ðries him abuten. - Bestiary, c1220

shined - as Gabe says, this was the most common past participle between 1300 and 1700:

The mone is alway halfe shyned of the sonne. - Trevisa, Bartholomeus (de Glanvilla) De proprietatibus rerum, 1398

We are sure, the good-will of Him who dwelt in the Bush has shined upon us. - Oliver Cromwell, Letters and speeches, 1648

And shone, originally the strong preterite form, started to be used as the past participle in the mid-1500s:

The aultars where the sacred flames haue shone. - George Gascoigne, Jocasta, 1566

1 comment :

Adam Roberts Project said...

And let us not forget 'shin'.

Or, wait: is that legs?