http://english.stackexchange.com/questi … ded-a-word

Drownd is an archaic form of drown from which drownded is an archaic form of drowned. It is still found in some dialects either by survival or by emphasis of the -ed since the rhymes-with-round sound of drowned may not sound as obviously past-tense to some ears as others.

It’s incorrectly frowned upon as incorrect, by people whose dialects did not retain drownd and drownded, and worth avoiding for that reason, especially in writing – so as to not only be correct, but to be seen to be correct.

But likewise, since it isn’t really incorrect, the only time it is appropriate to criticise someone for using it is if you are enforcing a style-guide (when you can criticise any decision that goes against it). Those using it are not wrong.

-glurk

Drownd(ed) is in the "clew" category, I suppose (along with some other forms and variations used by Z), i.e. archaic and/or uncommon but not erroneous spellings as such.

Interesting find, though – thanks for sharing it.

My immediate take on Little Benny would be – I guess – that his errors are more conventionally "childish" than Zodac’s, whose misspellings seem to follow a different pattern (if there is a pattern). There may certainly be some overlapping, though – some words are hard to misspell in multiple ways, so to speak.

Interesting find.There’s a thread here someplace about James Joyce’s book, Finnegan’s wake, in which he deliberately misspells words, many of which are spelled incorrectly in the same way that Z misspelled them.