stative / action verbs

[Vanina Petrova]

I have some difficulty working out that have in the expression 'have a surprise' is actually an action verb. The example is:
Our grandmother would always have a surprise waiting for us when we visited. Obviously, because of the rule that would is only used with action verbs, this expression must be one of those, but how do I explain it?

 

[Tarheel]

Are you sure "surprise" is a verb there?

 

[Vanina Petrova]

The expression is have a surprise, obviously, surprise is not a verb.

 

[5jj]

The expression is have a surprise. Obviously, surprise is not a verb.

Note my correction.

Think of have something ready/waiting as meaning have prepared something.

 

[Tarheel]

Use "have" there in the sense of possession.

 

[Tdol]

She had to act to create the surprise.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

Think of have something ready/waiting as meaning have prepared something.

That makes sense, thank you.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

She had to act to create the surprise.

That is exactly what I was thinking, I needed someone to say it explicitly. Thank you.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

Use "have" there in the sense of possession.

That is the thing, it doesn't mean possess here.

 

[jutfrank]

I have some difficulty working out that have in the expression 'have a surprise' is actually an action verb.

That's no wonder because 'have' isn't an action verb. It's a state verb.

 

[Tarheel]

That is the thing, it doesn't mean possess here.

Yes, it does. She has a surprise waiting for them.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

That's no wonder because 'have' isn't an action verb. It's a state verb.

Not always. Expressions like have a shower / have breakfast can be used in the continuous.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

Yes, it does. She has a surprise waiting for them.

Well, English File Advanced 4th edition (SB) thinks otherwise: Grammar Bank 2A, p. 144.

 

[jutfrank]

Not always. Expressions like have a shower / have breakfast can be used in the continuous.

I didn't mean that 'have' is always stative. I was talking about the context you provide in post #1.

because of the rule that would is only used with action verbs, this expression must be one of those

That's much too strong. Look at the following examples:

My grandmother would always know the right thing to do.
My sister would always be the last one to leave the party.
My brother would never have any money when we went out.

Does it make sense to conclude that know, be and have here are action verbs? They clearly aren't.

When we use 'would' for characterising people/things in the way you're talking about, it doesn't mean that the verbs we use are necessarily action verbs. If there's a rule to use here, it's more of a general tendency—we can say that the way that we characterise people is by saying how they habitually behave, and that most behaviour is typically expressed with dynamic verbs.

 

[jutfrank]

Well, English File Advanced 4th edition (SB) thinks otherwise: Grammar Bank 2A, p. 144.

I don't think it does say otherwise. Here's exactly what it says:

We don't use would with stative verbs, i.e. to talk about situations or states which have changed. NOT I would have much longer hair when I was younger.

I say that have in Our grandmother would always have a surprise waiting for us does express possession of sorts. In any case, the important thing (the teaching point) is that the whole sentence describes a certain habitual and characteristic behaviour.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

I don't think it does say otherwise. Here's exactly what it says:

We don't use would with stative verbs, i.e. to talk about situations or states which have changed. NOT I would have much longer hair when I was younger.

I say that have in Our grandmother would always have a surprise waiting for us does express possession of sorts. In any case, the important thing (the teaching point) is that the whole sentence describes a certain habitual and characteristic behaviour.

Here is what the textbook says in the first place:
We use would + infinitive as an alternative to used to to talk about things that we did repeatedly in the past.
'We did' is the key phrase, it means action, not a state.
'Habitual and characteristic behaviour' also suggests the same - action, not a state.

 

[jutfrank]

'We did' is the key phrase, it means action, not a state.
'Habitual and characteristic behaviour' also suggests the same - action, not a state.

When we characterise people with would in this way, not only do we say what people did, but we also describe how people were. That is, it's not always about behaviour in the sense of actively doing things.

If I have a surprise for you, it's not that I'm actively 'doing' anything. The 'doing' part is the preparing of the surprise, the intending to surprise you with it (arguably), and the surprising itself, but not the 'having' of the surprise.

 

[Vanina Petrova]

When we characterise people with would in this way, not only do we say what people did, but we also describe how people were. That is, it's not always about behaviour in the sense of actively doing things.

If I have a surprise for you, it's not that I'm actively 'doing' anything. The 'doing' part is the preparing of the surprise, the intending to surprise you with it (arguably), and the surprising itself, but not the 'having' of the surprise.

Thank you for your time and thought, it has enabled me to look further (and deeper) into the issue. I suppose every verb form comprises both action and state, perhaps we should think which the predominant aspect is in any given case.

 

[jutfrank]

I suppose every verb form comprises both action and state, perhaps we should think which the predominant aspect is in any given case.

That's right, I think.

My view of this, after literally decades of thinking about what it is that makes a verb stative or active, is still not clear. Take the following sentence:

Stop being silly.

Are we going to say that being is a stative verb here when it's very clear that it's about how you're behaving, and that something is happening? I think we have to.

 

[5jj]

Stop being silly.

Are we going to say that being is a stative verb here when it's very clear that it's about how you're behaving, and that something is happening? I think we have to.

We have to say that being is a stative verb here?