Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default have or have got???

    Hello teachers!

    At school I was thought that we use "do" to form the negative and interrogative of present simple tense.

    for example:
    I have a dog.
    I don't have a dog.
    Do I have a dog?

    But in the old books of English grammar that I found here in Romania I noticed that the verb have it was thought as "to have got"

    ex:
    I have got a dog.
    I haven't got a dog.
    Have I got a dog?


    Questions: 1. are the both forms correct?
    2. Which one is better two use?
    3. Explain to me please when do we use have got, in what situation?

    thanks.

  2. #2
    jamiep is offline Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • Scotland
      • Current Location:
      • Thailand
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    325
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    You can use "got" with "have" to indicate possession, so in the examples you gave, both "have" and "have got" are correct and either can be used.

    Both can also be used for obligation.

    "I have to go" or "I have got to go".

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,553
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    OK, this will get a bit complicated. Are you ready for this?

    There are different types of verb. You can have main verbs, which describe actions (play, sing, write); auxiliary verbs, which help with the grammar; and modal verbs, which describe possibility or permission (can, will, may).

    The modal verbs are do, have and be. We use have, for example, to build the present perfect. Take this sentence:

    Peter has made a cake.

    Here, "has" doesn't mean anything at all. The action is described with "made", which comes from "make", and that's the main verb. "Has", from "have", is only there to help with the grammar.

    Modal verbs also count as auxiliaries -- in fact, they are often called "modal auxiliaries":

    Peter can make cakes.

    Here, "make" is the actual action: "can" just indicates that Peter has the ability to do that thing.

    When we want to make a negative, we put the word "not" after the auxiliary verb, like this:

    Mary is playing the saxophone. -> Mary is not playing the saxophone.
    Gordon has written a letter. -> Gordon has not written a letter.
    I can see for miles. -> I cannot see for miles.

    That's simple, but what happens in a tense like the present simple or the past simple, where there is no auxiliary? "We bake bread" -- no auxiliary to put "not" after. In that case, the auxiliary "do" comes to our aid. It arrives, like Superman, to help out when no other auxiliary verb can help:

    We bake bread. -> We do not bake bread.

    The same is true of questions.

    This explains why:

    I have got a dog -> I do not [or: don't] have a dog.

    "Have" is an auxiliary, and "got" is the main verb.

    But that doesn't explain:

    I have a dog. -> I don't have a dog.

    Shouldn't that be, "I haven't a dog"?

    Well, in informal speech it can be, and in fact some native speakers do say it that way. But strictly speaking, the construction with "do" is more logical. But why should we? Isn't "have" an auxiliary?

    The answer is: Not always. "Have" can sometimes be a main verb: it means the same as "possess". So in this case, when "have" actually means something, we use "do".

    In the same way, "do" can also be a main verb:

    I did my homework. -> I did not do my homework.

    Here, we have to add another "do", because in the original sentence "did" (the past tense of "do") is actually a main verb.

    That's why the traditional, formal greeting "How do you do?" has "do" twice: the first is an auxiliary needed because we have to make a question; and the second is the main verb.

    "Be" is a special case. You can always put "not" after "be": I am not German.

    Which is better? Well, when it means "possess" or "must", we can use either "have" as a main verb, or we can use "get" as the main verb in the present perfect, "have got" -- both are correct. But "have got" is used more in Britain than in the US, and it sounds a little bit less formal.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    thanks a lot.
    this was useful.
    it is a little bit funny for me the thing that for example a word is used in British English and other in American English.
    the problem in Romania is that we don't learn let's say British Engl. or Amer. English. we mix them. the accent too. so sometimes I have to explain to myself we a word or a phrase is used more often than other. te explanation is that there is Br. English and. Amer. Engl.

  5. #5
    riverkid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,063
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    Quote Originally Posted by rewboss View Post

    The modal verbs are do, have and be.

    I don't think that Rewboss intended to say this, but I'll let him speak for himself.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    Quote Originally Posted by riverkid View Post
    I don't think that Rewboss intended to say this, but I'll let him speak for himself.
    I know that those are auxiliary verbs.
    But what matters is that I understood that the both forms are good.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,553
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: have or have got???

    Quote Originally Posted by riverkid View Post
    I don't think that Rewboss intended to say this, but I'll let him speak for himself.
    Good catch. I did, of course, mean "auxiliary verbs".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •