jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (8 posts)

Burnt or burned? Which of the two is grammartically correct?

  1. cuttler profile image59
    cuttlerposted 4 years ago

    Burnt or burned? Which of the two is grammartically correct?

  2. profile image0
    Copper Manposted 4 years ago

    I think they are interchangable. However I might use them as follows:
    She burned the toast.
    I ate burnt toast for breakfast.

    1. cuttler profile image59
      cuttlerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Great. Thanks Copper Man

  3. janshares profile image96
    jansharesposted 4 years ago

    I'm not sure they are interchangeable but I agree with Copper Man's examples.
    "I burned the steak while cooking it in the pan."
    "I put the burnt steak on the plate."

  4. profile image0
    JThomp42posted 4 years ago

    Both are grammatically correct. It is just in what form they are used my friend.

  5. liesl5858 profile image87
    liesl5858posted 4 years ago

    Burnt and burned are both correct grammar but it depends on how you use it in your sentences.

  6. myefforts profile image81
    myeffortsposted 4 years ago

    I believe both are correct.

    Burnt - Ruined by overcooking e.g. she served us burnt biscuits.

    Burned - Destroyed or badly damaged by fire. e.g. a burned-over site in the forest

  7. Ben716 profile image88
    Ben716posted 3 years ago

    Both are correct. The differences arises from the different spellings between America and Britain. English letters from these two countries vary a little bit. For example, honor (America) and honour (Britain).

    Burned is how it is written in Britain and the countries colonized by it while Burnt is written that way in America.

    As a person who grew up learning Britain's language, it was more of a confusion to come cross similar words with one letter missing or somehow changed but same meaning.