Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. Helder
    Guest
    #1

    Smile Have not / Don't have

    Teacher,

    could you please explain me the use of Have not and Don't have. Or the difference of both?

    I thank you in advance.

    Helder
    hpeixoto@usiminas.com.br
    Belo Horizonte City, Brazil.


    • Join Date: Aug 2007
    • Posts: 39
    #2

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    I think that you have a problem with have and have got. Is that right?

  2. #3

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    I can't answer as a teacher, I'm not one, but I believe I can give an accurate answer anyway.

    In modern American English, I don't believe there is any relation between "have not" (used only in have not done i.e. "I have not eaten", "I have not rested today.") and "do not have."

    What you seem to be confusing is a British convention to use the contraction "haven't" before nouns to indicate they don't possess something. Which I feel (and I'm truly sorry for saying this) is just silly, since when you remove the contraction it becomes obviously ungrammatical. Anyway, the examples:

    "I haven't the time to play with you today." (Note [as far as I know] you cannot say "I have not the time")

    A: I know you have it with you.
    B: I haven't!

    versus

    "I don't have the time to play with you today."
    "I do not have the time to play with you today."


    However, I did mention in another post that I feel inclined to classify "have" as a third "basic verb" in English sentence structures, and "haven't" would be more logical under such a system. And indeed in some classical senses it is clear that "have" was once classified this way.

    "I have not the courage to confront him."

    "I have the will, but the ability, I have not."

    But the same can be said of any run-of-the-mill verb as well.

    "Fear not, help shall arrive soon!"
    "Waste not, want not."

    Curiously I wonder how often "naught" was incorrectly written as "not".

    Oh well.

    I (do) wear.
    I do not wear.

    I am tired
    I am not tired.

    I have a dog.
    I have not a dog. (What is it like to have "not a dog"?)

    Here we can see, obviously, why have is negated by "do not".


    • Join Date: Aug 2007
    • Posts: 39
    #4

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    I have not a dog is not correct.

    However, a British person would put that right by adding a got:

    I haven't got a dog is a correct sentence.

    An American person would normally say:

    I have a dog.
    I don't have a cat.
    Do you have a car? Yes, I do / No, I don't.
    Does he have a computer? Yes, he does/No, he doesn't.

    A British would use have got rather than have:

    I have got a cat.
    I haven't got a dog.
    Have you got a car? Yes, I have/ No, I haven't.
    Has he got a computer? Yes, he has/ No, he hasn't.

    That's what grammar books taught us.
    Last edited by bendriss; 31-Aug-2007 at 21:49.

  3. engee30's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Polish
      • Home Country:
      • Poland
      • Current Location:
      • England

    • Join Date: Apr 2006
    • Posts: 2,969
    #5

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Quote Originally Posted by bendriss View Post
    I have not a dog is not correct...

    ...That's what grammar books taught us.
    Not me, I'm afraid.

    The sentences:

    I haven't got a dog.
    I don't have a dog.

    and
    I have not (haven't) a dog.

    are of equal meaning, and correct. But the fact is that the last version is rarely used now. (At least I haven't heard anyone say like that for ages).

    That's what my grammar books taught me.
    ___________________________
    NOTE:
    Bear in mind I'm not a teacher!

  4. Casiopea's Avatar

    • Join Date: Sep 2003
    • Posts: 12,970
    #6

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming View Post
    I can't answer as a teacher, I'm not one, but I believe I can give an accurate answer anyway.

    What you seem to be confusing is a British convention to use the contraction "haven't" before nouns to indicate they don't possess something. Which I feel (and I'm truly sorry for saying this) is just silly, since when you remove the contraction it becomes obviously ungrammatical.
    No apologies necessary, but "just silly" is a personal opinion, not an "accurate answer". Please be reminded that language doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's living and it's a sense of pride in its speakers, both native and non-native, so when you describe it, remember that you are in essence describing its speakers. In other words, in saying that a British convention is just silly is like saying it is as silly as its speakers are silly.

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming
    "I haven't the time to play with you today." (Note [as far as I know] you cannot say "I have not the time")
    You can, yes. It's emphatic, though.

    Emphatic
    I have not!
    I do not have the time to play with you today.

    I do wear ...
    I do not wear ...

    I have a dog.
    I have not a dog.

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming
    However, I did mention in another post that I feel inclined to classify "have" as a third "basic verb" in English sentence structures, ...
    Which dialect of English, and could you provide us with a definition of a third basic verb?

  5. #7

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Don't have time, but really want to discuss this (on another thread perhaps). In my (limited, untrained) view, there are three basic kinds of sentences which revolve around a basic verb (in English a sentence can technically exist as just a verb/predicate [although in fact the subject is simply understood]).

    Those basic verbs are:
    observations about the state of things.("to be" verbs)
    "It is raining."
    "I am tired."

    observations about the actions of things.("to do" verbs)
    I eat.
    The dog sits.
    (ignore things like "The dog is sitting." as immaterial)

    observations about existence or reality, the one I'm not sure about.
    I have food.
    Am I being? Am I doing? I am certainly not "having", then what?

    That's what I mean.

    RE: silly
    To be fair I criticise silly Americanisms and illogical idiosyncrasies of other languages I speak with equal asperity. e.g.
    "You see what I'm saying?"(Me:No, how could I possibly see what you're...oh nevermind.)

  6. Casiopea's Avatar

    • Join Date: Sep 2003
    • Posts: 12,970
    #8

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming View Post
    Don't have time, ...
    Take your time; we'll be here.

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming
    Those basic verbs are:

    observations about the state of things.("to be" verbs)
    "It is raining."
    "I am tired."

    observations about the actions of things.("to do" verbs)
    I eat.
    The dog sits.
    (ignore things like "The dog is sitting." as immaterial)

    observations about existence or reality, the one I'm not sure about.

    I have food.
    Am I being? Am I doing? I am certainly not "having", then what?
    weiming, are those recognized classes, or your interpretation of how verbs should be classified? The reason I ask, I'm not at all familiar with the terms you're using, which means our members aren't familiar with those terms either. So, if you are going to give advice, please state whether that information comes from a recognized source or stems from your personal opinion.

    __________

    Please be reminded that if you are not a teacher, you need to state that clearly in each of your posts. Otherwise, your posts will be subject to deletion. This is an ask a teacher forum. Members are expecting to hear from a teacher.



    Quote Originally Posted by weiming
    RE: silly

    To be fair I criticise silly Americanisms and illogical idiosyncrasies of other languages ...
    It's not a matter of being fair, weiming, and criticisms are welcome as long as they are constructive. Choose your words carefully, because language that lends itself to the distruction of human dignity and spirit is neither fair nor constructive.

  7. #9

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Le-sigh...

    Ok, so: Imagine my surprise on returning home from work to find my previous post with a horrible error in it! I forgot to mention that I was writing the post five minutes before I had to dash out the door and forgot to add two crucial words to "don't have time..." "...right now!". Sincere apologies for the transgression.

    Casiopea, you wrote:

    "...if you are going to give advice, please state whether that information comes from a recognized source or stems from your personal opinion."

    after I wrote:

    "In my (limited, untrained) view..."

    Explicitly reiterating that the classifications to be made were my own and that I am not a teacher. No in fact, I just made up this system of classification on my own, mainly to help students who are speakers of two Asian languages who's basic structures do not revolve around such verbs as romance languages do.

    Incidentally:

    See the table at about the middle of this page:
    Untitled Document

    Search this page (Ctrl+F) for: "being, doing and having schema":
    Linguistic Systems and the Physiology of verbs

    And (of you're still not convinced)here's a pile of books on this (among other) classification:
    classification of verbs doing being - Google Book Search

    But all of that is immaterial anyway. Just because others have designed similar systems does not make it any more or less legitimate, it's just one way of suggesting verbs be classified, and was offered specifically as my own personal idea.

    Next:

    I will be more than happy to offer a disclaimer of my qualifications before any post in which I attempt to answer or offer authoritative opinion on a question, comfortable in the knowledge that the people asking are more interested in a correct answer and being answered than the cut of the tweed of the answer-giver.

    Moreover:

    Language is silly and idiosyncratic in its very nature, and as such is the subject of all manner of joke and pun. I note that at the same time that I dismiss the structure for its apparent oddity, I was also careful to list a British variant, and a plethora of examples in which it was classically acceptable and survives in some sayings, while noting that it is no longer a fixture of (specifically) modern American English.

    I note as well, -bendriss- (sorry to drag you into this, old pal) states flat out that the structure is just plain wrong, (presumably with no exceptions) and yet doesn't get the same stiff demand for credentials. Perhaps the same nerve wasn't touched.

    And finally:

    I believe there still many many people I can help on this site quite a lot but, were it not for them and my extreme paitence for the ubiquitious online attitude that goes from zero to total personal instult faster than google can return search results, I assure you this would be my last post on these forums. Perhaps the next time I see a question I will have not the time to answer it, and not just for the moment.

    [aside: not that google means much of anything when it comes to spoken language but: do a google search for "have not a" and check how many entries (roughly 4 billion) are followed by nouns, you might be surprised.]
    Last edited by weiming; 02-Sep-2007 at 17:26.

  8. Casiopea's Avatar

    • Join Date: Sep 2003
    • Posts: 12,970
    #10

    Re: Have not / Don't have

    Quote Originally Posted by weiming View Post
    ... I am not a teacher.
    Thank you for stating that clearly.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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