get one's back

[hhtt21]

This is about cyber security.

1. Get one year free of the industrial grade anti-virus protection.
   
2. Install it on all your computers.
   
3. Run regular scans to ensure your personal memories are forever protected.
   

Are you that person? The Valentine everyone desires….be that Valentine.

We got your back.
The VIPRE Team

Would you please explain the part "We got your back."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

It means We're protecting you, we're watching out for you, we have your back covered.


​It's common but non-standard American English.

 

[hhtt21]

It means We're protecting you, we're watching out for you, we have your back covered.


​It's common but non-standard American English.

What is non-standard American English? It's from an e-mail sent by a firm.

 

[Rover_KE]

... and becoming more common in British English, too, due to the frequency with which it's heard in films and TV crime dramas and cop series.

 

[hhtt21]

What is non-standard American English? It's from an e-mail sent by a firm.

I understood it now that non-standard=informal here.

 

[jutfrank]

The normal expression is to have somebody's back. So it should normally be We've got your back. It's non-standard in that it doesn't include the have.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

And just to be clear, get your back is meaningless and never used. We use the expression got your back.

(Well, I don't. But a lot of people do.)

 

[Tdol]

Have got works better for me in BrE.

 

[emsr2d2]

For me too, as long as it's contracted. I find "I've/We've got your back" natural. I definitely don't find "I have/We have got your back" natural.

 

[hhtt21]

For me too, as long as it's contracted. I find "I've/We've got your back" natural. I definitely don't find "I have/We have got your back" natural.

But in speech, you cannot distinguish whether or not they are contracted. So in speech do you find them both natural?

 

[emsr2d2]

Of course you can distinguish if they're contracted or not. "I've" doesn't sound like "I have" and "We've" doesn't sound like "We have".

 

[GoesStation]

But in speech, you cannot distinguish whether or not they are contracted.

I think you mean that it's hard to distinguish We've got from We got. That's not the case for native speakers.

 

[hhtt21]

I think you mean that it's hard to distinguish We've got from We got. That's not the case for native speakers.

Meanwhile would you please explain why you prefered that instead of this? The sentence cannot neither be referred to as nearby nor far away in time.

 

[GoesStation]

I think you mean that it's hard to distinguish We've got from We got. That's not the case for native speakers.

Meanwhile would you please explain why you prefered that instead of this? The sentence cannot [STRIKE]neither[/STRIKE] be referred to as nearby [STRIKE]nor[/STRIKE] or far away in time.

Either word would have worked there. I probably chose that's because it's shorter.

 

[Tdol]

The sentence cannot neither be referred to as nearby nor far away in time.

If you're looking for the distance, it could be between the non-native speakers who find it hard to hear the difference, and the native speakers who can. However, this would also work.

 

[hhtt21]

Either word would have worked there. I probably chose that's because it's shorter.

Meanwhile would you please explain why you prefered that instead of this? The sentence cannot be referred to as nearby far away in time.

How can you form above sentence with using the neither-and-nor structure?

 

[GoesStation]

The sentence [STRIKE]cannot be referred to as[/STRIKE] is neither nearby nor far away in time.

How can you form the above sentence [STRIKE]with[/STRIKE] using the neither-and-nor structure?

See above.

 

[hhtt21]

"Unlike most people here I don't believe Elon’s IQ is that high."

Is this one of the example of interchangeability between that and this?

https://www.quora.com/What-is-Elon-Musks-IQ

 

[GoesStation]

"Unlike most people here I don't believe Elon’s IQ is that high."

Is this one of the example of interchangeability between that and this?

No, it's definitely not. It's another way to say Musk's IQ is not as high as all that, which is an idiom meaning "not terribly high". The word that is heavily emphasized when you say not that high aloud.

 

[Tdol]

That means something like very/particularly here to me.