At 12:28 p.m. 30/05/2014, Writer wrote:
>It's not a verb in this case; it's a predicate adjective.
>> From: Robert Lauriston <>
>>To: Stephen O'Brien <>; "Frame Users 
>>(" <> 
>>Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 11:42:49 AM
>>Subject: Re: Fit or fitted?
>>Per Betty Azar, in American English, the present, simple past, and past tense 
>>of the verb "to fit" are all "fit." 

Actually, it's not.  The example from the OP used "fit" as a transitive verb 
and "fitted" was applied as the past participle.  A pedagogue would rule this 
usage illegal but English, the bastard language of the world, grows this way.  
Usage of "fit" as a transitive verb has become widespread in my lifetime, 
although I'd have got the red crayon if I used it in a high school composition.

Things get muddy when we try to use fit in the passive voice, which is the 
usage in question here.  Intransitive verbs can't be used in passive voice so 
what do we do?  We can try to borrow the past historic of the intransitive 
verb, which is "fit" or we can pursue the formation of a participle by 
regularising it.  "The members iof the Olympic team were fit for their new 
uniforms" doesn't work.  "The members of the Olympic team were fitted for their 
new uniforms" seems to. 

My call would be that the regularising rule applies here.  If the OP MUST use 
passive voice (dubious tech writing practice at best) then make "fitted" the 
participle, rather than awkwardly stealing the past historic from the 
transitive verb. It fits better (sic: intransitive!) with other forward 
formations that are already in use.



You are currently subscribed to framers as

Send list messages to

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
or visit

Send administrative questions to Visit for more resources and info.

Reply via email to