Lit vs. Lighted

notpc · Nov 10, 2007

Hi,

The past tense form of too light, lighted, always feels like finger nails screeching on the caulkboard to my ears every time I read it. When I write about lighting a candle, or any form of light source, I always write, ‘He lit the candle’. Is this proper grammar or does lit grate on everyone's brains and I should be writing lighted?

WendyNYC · Nov 10, 2007

I believe either is grammatically correct. "Lit" is probably more common, at least with Americans.

notpc · Nov 10, 2007

WendyNYC said:
I believe either is grammatically correct. "Lit" is probably more common, at least with Americans.

That's funny because I was born in England, lived there till I was nine and I never heard lighted. But lighted is all over american books. But then I'm terrible at grammar and spelling.

I might use lighted if I had a character like Huck Fin talking out lighting a candle in a cave.

Shweta · Nov 10, 2007

Pretty sure "lit" is the standard past tense at this point.

I'm trying to figure out when I would use "lighted". It seems archaic to me, and perhaps I would use it in cases of causation. ETA: It probably isn't archaic, but rather a new regular-past-tense formation, but it feels archaic to me

"stars lighted my path through the woods" perhaps? "stars lit my path" seems a little weird.

Judg · Nov 10, 2007

Canadian Oxford Dictionary informs me that the past is "lit" but that the adjective can be "lighted", as in "the lighted match".

If however you use it in the sense of come across by chance, "lighted" is an acceptable alternative. "He lighted upon an article about Maria Callas."

Sandi LeFaucheur · Nov 10, 2007

Collins Dictionary (English) says lighted or lit. Lighted is first, so I assume that's the preferred form. But I've never, ever, heard it. (And I'm English.) Sounds awful! So I'll continue to say lit. Lighted sounds like something a four-year-old would say.

Judg · Nov 10, 2007

So there you have it, notpc. No clear consensus. Doesn't that just make your day?

notpc · Nov 11, 2007

You know Judg I got from this that Lit is what I should be saying. Probably because I like it better than lighted anyway. I'm glad that another person brought up in the English school system has never heard of Lighted before. That just warms me cockles.

I'm not a grammarian, snob, and I make plenty of mistakes in my sentence construction but when I hear lighted used in everyday language I just want to scream.

Thanks, for everyone’s input. It has lighted up my heart to know I can get great input from you guys.

Nalani Ashmore · Nov 11, 2007

Lit sounds like it should be past tense, but I'm sure there might be a way to word to it can be present. But that's just me.

Marlys · Nov 11, 2007

In American English, there is a regional difference in past-tense verb formation:

woke and waked. Regional American dialects vary in the way that certain verbs form their principal parts. Northern dialects seem to favor forms that change the internal vowel in the verb—hence dove for the past tense of dive and woke for wake: They woke up with a start. Southern dialects, on the other hand, tend to prefer forms that add -ed to form the past tense and the past participle of these same verbs: The children dived into the swimming hole. The baby waked up early.--The American Heritage Book of English Usage.

Following the same rules, "lit" might be more natural to Northerners, and "lighted" to Southerners. For what it's worth, I tend to hear more -ed forms as I get older, so I wonder if the internal-vowel-change forms are starting to disappear (at least in America).

Voyager · Nov 11, 2007

Shweta said:
I'm trying to figure out when I would use "lighted".

Comes in handy in Spanglish. The church estava todo lighted up.

notpc · Nov 11, 2007

I'm reading Tom Sawyer right now and he uses lighted. While reading it to my kids I change lighted to lit when I come across it. (I also do some other political correct vebal editing too.)

I don't think I've ever come across Waked or Drived in any narative. I can see were it can be used in dialog.

Carmy · Nov 11, 2007

British school system here, too. Lit every time. Just lately I've been coming across lighted and I don't like it.

I also have a problem with dove instead of dived.

notpc · Nov 12, 2007

Carmy said:
British school system here, too. Lit every time. Just lately I've been coming across lighted and I don't like it.

I also have a problem with dove instead of dived.

I think I prefer dove to dived.

IceCreamEmpress · Nov 12, 2007

Sandi LeFaucheur said:
Collins Dictionary (English) says lighted or lit. Lighted is first, so I assume that's the preferred form.

I'm pretty sure it's first because it's first alphabetically--I don't think Collins hierachizes through order alone.

maestrowork · Nov 12, 2007

I tend to use them in the following ways:

I lighted the fire and went for some cognac.

I lit the cigarette and listened to her.

Mostly likely I'd just use "lit." It sounds more natural.

clockwatcher · Nov 12, 2007

I've never used "lighted." Sounds like such bad grammar to me.

benbradley · Nov 12, 2007

Lighted seems unusual to me.

FWIW, I've many times heard "lit (up) like a Christmas tree" to describe a drunk person, but never "lighted (up) like a Christmas tree."

KansasWriter · Nov 12, 2007

"Lighted" drove me nuts in "Atlas Shrugged"...every twenty pages someone "lighted" a cigarette and my brain hiccuped. I had never heard this before and, until this thread, I assumed it was early 20th century English - American or otherwise.

IceCreamEmpress · Nov 13, 2007

The place you do want to use "lighted" is as the past participle.

"The lamps were lighted every evening about six."

Even so, I like "lit" unless you're talking about the activity of lighting: "The room was lit only by the flames of rustic torches."

dobiwon · Nov 14, 2007

Most of the time, I would use lit. However, in a sentence such as

"Torches mounted on the walls lighted the path through the labyrinth."

lit doesn't quite sound right to me. (of course, by substituting 'illuminated' the issue can be avoided

)

Shweta · Nov 14, 2007

dobiwon said:
Most of the time, I would use lit. However, in a sentence such as

"Torches mounted on the walls lighted the path through the labyrinth."

lit doesn't quite sound right to me. (of course, by substituting 'illuminated' the issue can be avoided )

I think this is analogous to my example above, but it's clearer.

Perhaps there's something about a path that makes it want to be lighted rather than lit? I think it's because we mean "lit up" here and not "lit".

However, I wouldn't say "incandescent lamps lighted the front of the house" or "streetlights lighted the alley". In these cased I would use "lit up".
So there's a register thing involved too.

mkcbunny · Nov 16, 2007

Marlys said:
In American English, there is a regional difference in past-tense verb formation:

Following the same rules, "lit" might be more natural to Northerners, and "lighted" to Southerners. For what it's worth, I tend to hear more -ed forms as I get older, so I wonder if the internal-vowel-change forms are starting to disappear (at least in America).

That's very interesting. I was raised in the northeast, and it never occurred to me that region might explain my preference. Lit, dove, woke ... I cringe at the "ed"s when I have another valid option.

Lit vs. Lighted

notpc

WendyNYC

fiddle-dee-dee

notpc

Shweta

gone

Judg

DISENCHANTED coming soon

Sandi LeFaucheur

Judg

DISENCHANTED coming soon

notpc

Nalani Ashmore

Marlys

Resist. Love. Go outside.

Voyager

Ribbed for your pleasure.

notpc

Carmy

notpc

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

clockwatcher

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world

KansasWriter

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago

dobiwon

Planning to retire for the 5th time

Shweta

gone

mkcbunny

Bufflehead