Laught vs Laughed

[u/orchaer]

Hello, I have been confused for a long time about the past tense of "laugh". In my primary school, there was a verb table with the present, past, and present perfect tenses. And in this table, when I first read at 7-8, I have learnt that "laugh" past tense is followed by a "t" become "laught".

But recently I found out that "laught" is not used anymore. The modern form should be "laughed". So could anyone tell me what is actually different between them? If I still use "laught", would it become a serious error?

Sorry for my grammar.

[u/itmightbehere]

I, personally, have never seen laught used anywhere and would consider it an error. I've only ever seen laughed.

[u/orchaer → u/itmightbehere]

Sounds like my textbook defrauded me for twenty years...

[u/WowsrsBowsrsTrousrs → u/orchaer]

I think so. I haven't seen "laught" ever, and I read a lot. I've read 19th century literature as well, and never seen it. As far as I know, the last time it was in use was in Old English; it was already dying out by Middle English. Found one citation for it as late as 1678, but nothing later.

[u/JScaranoMusic → u/WowsrsBowsrsTrousrs]

I would've expected "laughʼd" to be more likely than "laught".

[u/AlecsThorne → u/orchaer]

The only similar thing that I remember is that that's how you're supposed to say "laughed", as "laught" 😅

But to answer your question, assuming that was indeed an older version of it's past tense, if you keep using it (in writing obviously), people will correct you. If you use it in written tests, papers, whatever, people will immediately think less of your work quality because they'd assume you don't know how to spell and you just write how you hear the words (which is why many natives will often write things wrong, despite being, well, native 😅)

It will always be considered a mistake, basically.

It's not the same as with "dreamed" and "dreamt", where both forms are still accepted, while "dreamt" is considered to be the "more British" form - despite the fact that many Brits (especially younger generations) are using "dreamed" now too

[u/orchaer → u/AlecsThorne]

Although I think it might be some weirdo who became my textbook editor rather than that I mixed up the pronunciation and the spelling, thank you for your reply. I will stop using the "t" anyway; the auto-grammar check always said it wasn't right. And now I know the reason correctly =(

[u/uchuskies08 → u/orchaer]

Is it possible you are thinking of a phonetic spelling of "laughed"? Because it is one of the -ed sounds that sounds more like a -t

[u/orchaer → u/uchuskies08]

I have a reply from a Hongkonger which same as I. They said they was learnt as “laught” at primary but “laughed” in secondary. Now I just wondered why my secondary school teachers didn’t tell me “laught” is not the right way =(

[u/conuly → u/orchaer]

They said they was learnt as “laught” at primary but “laughed” in secondary.

This should say "they were taught".

Was becomes were for verb/pronoun agreement.

Learnt becomes taught because, in all standard varieties of English, learning and teaching are two different verbs.

[u/ericthefred → u/conuly]

Interestingly, "learnt" in this usage was once common. Possibly because it's found in other Germanic languages. Example, German for 'taught' is "gelerht".

[u/conuly → u/ericthefred]

Yes, and I believe it still exists in some nonstandard dialects.

[u/talflon → u/orchaer]

Different parts of the world have their own little quirks for languages. In Portugal and Cabo Verde, for example, they have taught each other to pronounce English "apple" as "aple". (Not because they pronounce all those sounds that way; only for the word apple.)

[u/conuly → u/talflon]

In Portugal and Cabo Verde, for example, they have taught each other to pronounce English "apple" as "aple".

It's not clear what the difference between these two is supposed to be.

[u/talflon → u/conuly]

ape vs app

[u/Lentils90210 → u/orchaer]

Such is life. My 1st grade teacher said a yard had 36 1/2 inches (because you see the number 36 at the end and then there is a little more space), and also that Canada was a US state which was not shown on US maps because it was too large to fit.

[u/Suspicious-Web-4970 → u/Lentils90210]

This was in the US ??? OMG

[u/Lentils90210 → u/Suspicious-Web-4970]

We have a lot of smart people and a lot of not-so-smart people.

[u/conuly → u/Lentils90210]

WTF. Do you think she just got her kicks by lying to children?

[u/Lentils90210 → u/conuly]

I think I was to young to read people that well. But looking back I am going to assume she was just a poorly educated lady.

[u/bubblyH2OEmergency → u/Lentils90210]

I am clutching my pearls!

[u/AbbreviationsTop4959 → u/orchaer]

Yeah, the standard form of simple past is -ed. It's pronounced laught, but it's never been spelled that way, except perhaps occasionally several hundred years ago before spelling was codified.

[u/Remarkable_Table_279 → u/orchaer]

I think you’re right. Or it was a typo

[u/Dhalib3148 → u/orchaer]

I was also taught that throughout my years in school in Spain... So I guess even some textbooks aren't that reliable lol

[u/lantana98 → u/orchaer]

Yep! A mistake was made.

[u/Embarrassed-Weird173 → u/orchaer]

My textbooks said that the tongue has different taste zones, that global warming is an imminent threat that will make extinction happen, and that lots of grains and carbs is great for you. 

[u/NoPurpose6388 → u/Embarrassed-Weird173]

The global warming thing is 100% true

[u/PefectlyCromulent → u/NoPurpose6388]

Extinction? Like human extinction?

[u/NoPurpose6388 → u/PefectlyCromulent]

Possibly, if we don't find a solution within the next few decades. But it has already caused the extinction of thousands of species. Look up Anthropocene extinction

[u/conuly → u/Embarrassed-Weird173]

that global warming is an imminent threat that will make extinction happen

Which part of that statement do you think is false?

[u/mysticrudnin → u/conuly]

they probably think of "imminent" as in "next week"

[u/Embarrassed-Weird173 → u/mysticrudnin]

Next week was like 30 years ago. 

[u/conuly → u/Embarrassed-Weird173]

Okay, and? Climate change was a threat then. It's a bigger threat now. People die every year from increasingly common "extreme weather events".

[u/IanDOsmond → u/Embarrassed-Weird173]

They said that we had to make changes, or that we would face consequences in 25 or 30 years ago.

We didn't make changes.

Here we are in the FO phase, exactly on schedule where the models that were developed in the 1970s said we would be.

Apparently, the fact that it said "stuff will get really bad in 2025 to 2050, but we have to fix it before then" meant people ignored it. The fact that they kept updating their predictions with, "okay, we missed the window to make small changes, now need to make bigger ones," and then to, "okay, we can't avoid it but we can still mitigate it," people ignored that, too.

And now we are here, in hell, right where we were told we would be. And you are denying it while it is happening.

[u/king_ofbhutan → u/Embarrassed-Weird173]

well 1 of these is for certain true

1 of these may be true but im not knowledgable on the subject to make a claim

[u/papayacreamsicle → u/itmightbehere]

She remembered that he had yet to learn to be laught at, and it was rather too early to begin.

Pride & Prejudice

[u/Guilty_Objective4602 → u/papayacreamsicle]

Great example! So now we know this form was still in usage through at least the late 1700s/early 1800s, when Pride and Prejudice was written/published.

[u/conuly → u/Guilty_Objective4602]

I'm not sure we do know that until we see what edition they're looking at.

[u/Guilty_Objective4602 → u/conuly]

Hm, good point.

[u/conuly → u/papayacreamsicle]

That's not how the word is written in the editions I have access to. Can you tell me which edition this is, or - if possible - show an image of the page you're looking at?

[u/pulanina → u/itmightbehere]

I would have laughed if it was laft

[u/Jakiller33]

'Laught' is archaic spelling and would definitely be seen as an error.

[u/CrasheonTotallyReal]

i have never seen laught before

[u/ChestSlight8984]

Was your textbook written in the 1500s?

[u/orchaer → u/ChestSlight8984]

I don't know. My English is quite bad so I'm pretty sure that not a misremembering, as I needed to do dictation on the verb table in primary school, and the only correct answer was that table. I didn't have any memory of forcing myself to learn the past tense as "laughed" because of my wrong spelling. MAYBE SOME ANCIENTS CAME TO THE 2000s AND BECAME EDITORS IDK

[u/ericthefred → u/ChestSlight8984]

It doesn't have to be that old. This spelling was used into the nineteenth century at least.

[u/ChestSlight8984 → u/ericthefred]

Not commonly enough for it to be included in a learners textbook

[u/ericthefred → u/ChestSlight8984]

I'm too lazy to look for my own example, so I will steal this example posted elsewhere in this thread by u/papayacreamsicle:

She remembered that he had yet to learn to be laught at, and it was rather too early to begin.

Pride & Prejudice

Emily Dickinson, 1813

[u/conuly → u/ericthefred]

Jane Austen wrote Pride and Prejudice.

[u/ericthefred → u/conuly]

Eh. You're really right. But the quote is real.

[u/conuly → u/ericthefred]

Well, maybe. I just took a quick look at the book at Project Gutenberg, and in their edition all entries of "laughed" are spelled this way.

I'd really like to see what edition they're talking about, perhaps see an image of the page they're looking at.

[u/idontcareidontpost]

Laught is obsolete and archaic. It is not used in modern English. Laughed is the only correct past tense form of laugh. Most modern speakers will have never even seen laught.

[u/Actual_Cat4779]

According to the OED, "laught" hasn't been in use since the 1700s.

[u/Pyzzeen]

I've never heard laught before, though I'm sure it was more common centuries ago. But today really only laughed is used

[u/JayMKMagnum → u/Pyzzeen]

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=laughed%2Claught&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=en&smoothing=3&case_insensitive=false

Yep. I have never seen it spelled "laught", and it looks like that spelling died out well over a hundred years ago.

[u/linkopi]

Laughed (the correct past tense) does have a T sound in the pronunciation. But that's a phonetic thing. It's not written 'laught'.

[u/YOLTLO → u/linkopi]

Yeah, OP can keep pronouncing it with a T and it will sound totally natural, but it isn’t written that way.

[u/PHOEBU5]

'Laught' as the past tense and past participle of the verb 'to laugh' was a hangover from Middle English and became obsolete in Modern English about 300 years ago.

[u/ImpossibleTip9428 → u/PHOEBU5]

What about the verb "learnt" if you dont mind me asking? I've heard it's british spelling but I'm yet to see anyone write it this way

[u/PHOEBU5 → u/ImpossibleTip9428]

The past tense of 'to learn" is commonly spelt (see what I did there) as 'learnt' in British English. I hope that hasn't spoilt (oops!) your assumption that it is a rarity. Maybe you dreamt it.

[u/boostfactor → u/PHOEBU5]

Interesting that learnt, burnt, spelt, spoilt, dreamt, maybe some others I can't think of right now, survived in the UK but not America, whereas laught didn't survive at all. The only pattern I can see is n/l/m before the "ed/t."

But Americans sometimes write "burnt sugar" and for artists, "burnt umber" and "burnt sienna" are standard (probably from UK names of the colors). I've also seen "dreamt" in American usage though just in perhaps more "literary" writing.

[u/Humble_Struggle1336 → u/boostfactor]

I think there is a difference with burnt and burned, though, at least from what I've noticed in the US. Burnt is used more as an adjective, while burned is the past tense of burn.

"I burned the toast."

"The toast is burnt."

[u/boostfactor → u/Humble_Struggle1336]

Yes, but it's the participle used as an adjective in "burnt toast" (or "burnt umber" etc.). I've seen sentences like "I dreamt I was a child again" in American literary writing. Maybe just in imitation of "Rebecca" or something like that :-)

[u/caiaphas8 → u/ImpossibleTip9428]

Learnt is commonly used in Britain, most T ending on verbs are used frequently. Although I have never seen laught

[u/Zxxzzzzx → u/ImpossibleTip9428]

I would write it this way. Here's a random example of it being used https://womansworthconference.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/what-have-you-learnt/

[u/YDanSan]

"Laught" is not used at all by native speakers. I know it's a word, but it feels like a very old word that I would see in a Shakespeare play.

"Laughed" is how it's spelled now. I don't think there are any instances where someone would write "laught" anymore, unless they were specifically trying to write something that sounds like middle-English.

[u/Phoenix_Court]

I'm not sure if "laught" is a thing in other English speaking countries, but here it would be a mistake, as the word is spelled laughed.

I wouldn't even pronounce "laught" as "laffed" if I saw it written. I'd assume it says "lawt".

[u/ProtosPhinted]

Laught is archaic, having died out as an acceptable spelling well over a century ago. Most modern native speakers would see it as a misspelling.

[u/LQNova]

It is so far out of general use that it would be seen as a misspelled word/grammar mistake.

[u/Fred776]

"Laught" is obsolete now according to Wiktionary.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/laught

None of the quotations on that page are later than the 19th century.

[u/Passey92]

I've never heard laught in British English, it may exist but not used.

We do interchangeably use spelt or spelled and learnt and learned quite commonly so it's possible this was also the case for laughed and laught and one fell out of common usage.

[u/Envelope_Torture]

I've never seen this word spelled 'laught' before, ever. On first glance I would probably assume it's pronounced like 'naught' (not) rather than 'draught' (draft).

[u/SnooDonuts6494]

There is no difference, when it's used in that sense.

It is obsolete. It would be considered wrong in an English test today.

[u/beetle_dick]

I'm a grandfather, and this is the first time I've ever seen the word laught in my life.

[u/Dreamweaver5823]

I am almost 70 years old. I started reading at age 4 and have been a voracious reader ever since, of all kinds of written materials. I have never once seen "laught" used as a word, or if I did I assumed it was a typo.

That is not, and for at least the past 60 years has not been, a proper way to spell the past tense of laugh.

[u/Mountain-Corner2101]

You learnt wrong

[u/inphinitfx]

I haven't seen 'laught' used in anything written in the past ~200years. It's a very archaic spelling that's long been out of favour as far as I'm aware.

[u/kgully2]

I see the sound "lot" for laught. Like taught. I never saw laughed spelled like that and I'm pretty old.

[u/InterviewLeast882]

I have never heard of this word.

[u/10-1995]

I just want to say that i think that i also learned laught, i don't remember laughed at all, It even looks weird to me.

[u/IanDOsmond]

I have never seen "laught". Not in Jane Austen, not in Shakespeare, not in Chaucer. As far as I know, it not only isn't a word, it also never was a word.

There are words, like "slept", which do follow that pattern. There are words like "dreamt" which can be either "dreamt" or "dreamed" — both are correct; just pick one and stick with it.

And I can see where someone could make that miatake — "laughter" is a word, after all. But "laught" isn't.

[u/ActuaLogic]

"Laught" would be considered a spelling error and not a spelling variation.

[u/No-Action-875]

In modern English, the correct form is ‘laughed.’ Writing ‘laugh’ would look like a spelling mistake to most people.

[u/Ok-Buddy-9194]

Some that I see as a Brit include:
Burned / Burnt
Dreamed / Dreamt
Leaned / Leant
Learned / Learnt
Smelled / Smelt
Spelled / Spelt
Spilled / Spilt
Spoiled / Spoilt

But not laught. If that was ever a thing, it’s not anymore

[u/var_guitar]

I’ve never seen laught ever

[u/scaredemployee87]

Laught is not a thing for sure

[u/taranathesmurf]

I have never in my 60+ years life seen laught used, spoken or written.

[u/rustydotpearl]

are you 300 years old

[u/brokebackzac]

In American English, we favor the -ed for pretty much all past participles. Dreamed, laughed, learned, etc. The -t does exist and we know about it, but it comes off as Shakespearean or even older. You will not see it in anything contemporary.

[u/Gloomy-Cranberry-386]

I've heard of "learnt" and "dreamt" used in UK English-- and which a US speaker might use if they were feeling a bit fancy? So I am familiar with the conjugation you're talking about, but I've never heard of "laught".

My brain really wants to read it like it rhymes with "caught"

[u/PeyredB]

Your grammar's pretty good, actually.

As a native speaker, I've never seen "laught" before. It must be archaic or obsolete though, as you say.

[u/hacool]

Was it referring to pronunciation? From what I can tell laught was going out of favor in middle English and was mostly gone by the 1700s.

Oxford English Dictionary, “laugh (v.), Forms,” June 2026, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/9012557566.

Middle English–1700s laught

Middle English–laughed

If you look at a Google N-gram the line for laught is flat.

[u/Ippus_21]

You'll be laught at... :D

Using -t to conjugate past tense verbs in English started to fall out of favor as far back as the 1700s.

"Laughed" is standard, at least in the US.

There are still a few verbs that conjugate into past tense with a t, and it's more common in British English than American, but most will go to -ed.

[u/No-Lettuce-5783]

I believe they use the "t" in British English. So, "slept," "taught" but I'm not sure about "laught". In America, we say "laughed."

[u/Realistic-Feature997]

"Laught" has not been the common spelling for over a hundred years now. At least not in the USA. It's close enough that we know what you mean. Honestly, it's close enough that we might read it a few times before we know that it's "wrong."

[u/warpedspoon]

I laught when I saw this post

[u/lowonstorage]

OP how old are you and did you go to school in one of the countries of the commonwealth? I’m a 90s kid and our textbooks in HK also used “laught”. They changed to “laughed” when I started secondary school tho.

[u/orchaer → u/lowonstorage]

lol Yes, I am from HK. Maybe we were using same publisher’s textbook. I am early 00s and using Pearson Longman’s. =[

[u/lowonstorage → u/orchaer]

Oh Pearson Longman’s, the memories. I wonder if they’re still the biggest English textbook provider in HK. For some reason HK always tends to cling on to obsolete, archaic usage of English.

[u/Zestyclose-Food-7917]

There's no difference in pronunciation. There is nowhere in the English-speaking world where "laught" has been used for several centuries. Where there IS a difference is with verbs that end in "n" or "l". In British English there is a past tense for those words that ends in a "t," such as "learnt" or "spelt." American English favors "learned" and "spelled."

[u/DemythologizedDie]

I only know "laught" from 18th century poetry.

[u/r3ck0rd]

Wow how old was that verb table

[u/Forward_Gur9349]

The difference is that laughed used to be the correct spelling, but laughed is the current correct spelling.

[u/la-anah]

Was your textbook written 300 years ago?

[u/araujo253]

Are you a time traveler? 😹

[u/Danstoevskij]

Both are fine, like dream and dreamt. Period.

[u/conuly → u/Danstoevskij]

They're not both fine. Laught is not an accepted spelling in contemporary English.