Learnt - English
Learned - American

Same meaning.

Sisikill:

Learnt - English
Learned - American

Same meaning.

That is not really true. It is true that the Americans use the word "learned" over "learnt" and vice versa for the Brits, but both are original English (as in as in Brit English and not American English) words. I am of course assuming that you mean "learned" as one of the tenses of the verb "to learn" and not as the independent word "learned i.e. lear-ned" which means knowledgeable (e.g. learned friend or learned professor).

If you are talking about tenses, "Learned" is the past tense of "Learn", while "Learnt" is the past participle of the same word i.e. "Learn". More often than not (and increasingly so), they can be used interchangeably.  Strictly speaking though, there are situations in which the past tense is grammartically appropriate and those in which the past participle is correct.  For example, it is more correct to say "I have learnt my lesson" and not "I have learned my lesson". This is an example of a situation in which the past participle (learnt) has followed the present perfect tense (have). If you just want to use the past tense in this situation, it is better to say "I learned my lesson" (though you may also say "I learnt my lesson". ^{Confusing I know, but don't even get me started on the issues that this complicated language throws up.}

I'm sorry but I don't get what exactly isn't really true? Is it that they don't mean the same or Learnt isn't British and Learned. . . American?

For example, it is more correct to say "I have learnt my lesson" and not "I have learned my lesson". This is an example of a situation in which the past participle

I don't think this is necessarily true. Sure saying learnt sounds better. . . that is "more correct" is up for debate

From BBC Mundo
I’m afraid there’s no simple answer to this one. Because basically either form is correct. I learned – ed – or I learnt to drive a truck in the army. Either one is correct.

But how can this be? Well, the ed form of the past tense is the regular form - I learned to drive a truck – I learned to cook – and very many past tenses end in this “ed”. And you will find there is a tendency for verbs to become more regular as time goes on. This is a feature of language change. Originally, in British English, everyone would have spelt the past tense of learn with T – I learnt to drive, I learnt to cook, but you’ll find more and more people in the UK now using the ed ending.

The same is true of verbs such as spell – as in I spelt it incorrectly – with a T at the end. But now you’ll find more and more people using - I spelled it incorrectly – with an ed at the end. This is probably due to the influence of American English coming into Britain because in the US the ed is used for learn, for spell, for dream for example - I dreamed it with an ed at the end. And you’ll find that this US spelling is starting to replace the original British spelling in British English.

The main thing to remember is that both of these forms are correct. However, the important thing for you to do is to choose which one you would like to use, and to use that one consistently. So try to avoid mixing the ed and the t endings. Try to use just the one, but it’s up to you to decide which one you want to use.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/spanish/specials/1125_questions/page6.shtml

From AskOxford
What is the difference between 'learnt' and 'learned'?

These are alternative forms of the past tense and past participle of the verb learn. Learnt is more common in British English, and learned in American English. There are a number of verbs of this type (burn, dream, kneel, lean, leap, spell, spill, spoil etc.). They are all irregular verbs, and this is a part of their irregularity.

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutspelling/learnt?view=uk

In my opinion, what is boils down to is familiarity. I get looks from people when I say learnt, spolit, spelt and I give people looks when they use the -ed words. Both sides are use to hearing it one way, it makes the other sound so wrong. . . so very, very wrong. For awhile, I had to set my word dictionary to British because it kept red-lining my T words. . .Ughhh! LOL

I've always been told that the Americans say learned and British say learnt.

Sisikill:

I'm sorry but I don't get what exactly isn't really true? Is it that they don't mean the same or Learnt isn't British and Learned. . . American?

I thought my response was clear as to what I meant. For the avoidance of doubt, what isn't exactly true is saying one is American and the other English. Like I said, though the Americans favour one over the other, they are both English with one being a past tense while the other is a past participle of the verb - learn ^{[Good to see you got confirmation of this fact from Oxford]}. And like I also said, both can be used interchangeably, but this still does not change their individual tense status. 

Sisikill:

I don't think this is necessarily true. Sure saying learnt sounds better. . . that is "more correct" is up for debate

Unfortunately, I have no control over what you think. Moreover, almost every topic under the sun is up for debate, so it's really no big deal if you feel this is another one.

Clarifications please!!!

I came across this explanation which I though might interest you:


The *prescriptive* answer is:
"learned" should used in phrases such as "a learned professor", in which case it is pronounced with two syllables.
"learnt" should be used in phrases like "I learnt a valuable lesson today".

The *descriptive* answer in British English is:
"learned" is used in phrases such as "a learned professor", in which case it is pronounced with two syllables.
Either "learnt" or "learned" are used interchangably in phrases like "I learnt a valuable lesson today".

The *descriptive* answer in American English is:
There is no such word as "learnt". Use "learned" always.

I really appreciate this lesson. The problem i have is the computer's spell check. It accepts none of them as correct

.

Well, this is one of those things that got me confused when I just started my writing career.
After researching the internt extensively, I discovered that both are correct and are used by both the British and the Americans.
As for me, I used "learned" in my writing and "learnt" in my speech.
(English language is interesting, but I think the American are adding spice to it with their craziness.)

The learned are always vigilant.
I learnt French while in Paris

topup: What is the difference between learnt and learned.

Please use examples, I often get confused in which I should use or why.

It was what I learnt.
It was what I learned.

??I learned from the best.
I learnt the hard way??

blissfullynaughty:

That is not really true. It is true that the Americans use the word "learned" over "learnt" and vice versa for the Brits, but both are original English (as in as in Brit English and not American English) words. I am of course assuming that you mean "learned" as one of the tenses of the verb "to learn" and not as the independent word "learned i.e. lear-ned" which means knowledgeable (e.g. learned friend or learned professor).

If you are talking about tenses, "Learned" is the past tense of "Learn", while "Learnt" is the past participle of the same word i.e. "Learn". More often than not (and increasingly so), they can be used interchangeably.  Strictly speaking though, there are situations in which the past tense is grammartically appropriate and those in which the past participle is correct.  For example, it is more correct to say "I have learnt my lesson" and not "I have learned my lesson". This is an example of a situation in which the past participle (learnt) has followed the present perfect tense (have). If you just want to use the past tense in this situation, it is better to say "I learned my lesson" (though you may also say "I learnt my lesson". ^{Confusing I know, but don't even get me started on the issues that this complicated language throws up.}

taa! mechie onu gi. the Americans use learned while learnt is British