On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 02:34:47PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2009/02/05 14:06, Hannah Schroeter wrote: > > Hi! > > > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 04:37:35AM -0700, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > >CVSROOT: /cvs > > >Module name: www > > >Changes by: st...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/02/05 04:37:35 > > > > >Modified files: > > > faq : faq8.html > > > > >Log message: > > >"why does...run on Solaris" -> "why did...used to run on Solaris" in the > > >section index, as was already done in the section header and index.html. > > > > Shouldn't it be "did ... use" without double use of past tense? > > See e.g. the example in http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/use[2] > > "intransitive verb 1 [...] <didn't use to smoke>". > > The "didn't use to smoke" example they give doesn't seem correct > to me (as a native UK english speaker).
"he used not to smoke" ;) i think that's how it would have been said once upon a time. both forms are fine, and i suspect for most it's just what you're used to. with negatives i personally think "didn't used to" sounds wrong, but that's just because i'm more familiar with the form hannah refers to. i think it's ok to leave it. jmc
