Yeet (/ji:t/) is a recently coined verb in English that seems to have taken on the characteristics of a strong verb, as seen in this hilarious urban dictionary definition.
In English, the strong verb system is no longer productive and has almost completely disintegrated, but some American English speakers are back-forming strong verbs, such as dove instead of dived and snuck instead of sneaked (for me, a native American English speaker, dove and snuck sound more correct than dived and sneaked).
It seems that the same thing has happened with the verb yeet. There is an ongoing discussion especially among younger people over whether yeet's past should be /ji:təd/, ("yeeted") or /joʊt/, ("yote").
The problem is, Germanic strong verbs don't behave like this. The /i:/ to /oʊ/ ablaut is really weird, and might mean the word was originally in class 5 but switched classes, and anyways means yeet should be spelled *yeat. Even more problematic is that in class 5 there is the word /it/ which in the past is /eɪt/, so perhaps yeet's past should be yate?
I feel that this is a very interesting topic as it seems to be (at least to my knowledge) the first coined strong verb. Is the past tense really yote, should it just be yeeted, or does it fall into another category of irregular English verb entirely? Are English strong verbs sercretly productive in certain situations (such as only with relatively simple verbs phonologically like yeet, or in American English only) or are they dead and gone? If there is a new strong verb system emerging, what does/should it look like?