Sorry I Am Already on It Try Again Pleb
- English grammer
English grammar – Have & accept got
- Written past Keith Taylor
- Last updated on 28 January, 2022
- On this page:
- Form and meaning
- Pronunciation
- Teaching ideas
Grade & meaning
- Have got and have are used to talk about possession.
- I've got a new house / I have a new house.
- Has she got a car? / Does she have a automobile?
- Take got and accept are used to talk about relationships.
- Accept you got a girlfriend? / Do you have a girlfriend?
- He's got 3 brothers / He has three brothers.
- Have got and accept are used to talk about illnesses.
- I've got a bad common cold / I have a bad cold.
- I've got a headache / I take a headache.
- Have got and have are used to talk about characteristics.
- Her office has got a nice view / Her office has a squeamish view.
- Why has he got a tattoo? / Why does he have a tattoo?
Additional points
- Have got and accept cannot be used in the progressive form to express the meanings above.
- I 've got / have a headache – correct
- I'1000 having a headache – Wrong
- have is more than common than accept got when talking in the by.
- She had a pink guitar when she was thirteen. – more than common
- She had got a pink guitar when she was thirteen. – less common
- Did you lot accept a headache yesterday? – more than common
- Had y'all got a headache yesterday? – less common
Pronunciation
See the phonemic nautical chart for IPA symbols used below.
- In fast connected speech, assimilation occurs with got in have got when the post-obit word begins with a vowel sound.
- I've got a cat: /gÉ’dÉ™/
Keith is the co-founder of Eslbase. He has been a teacher and instructor trainer for over twenty years, in Republic of indonesia, Australia, Kingdom of morocco, Spain, Italian republic, Poland, France and now in the Uk.
Comments
Need to become TEFL qualified?
Source: https://www.eslbase.com/grammar/have-got
have is passive, get is active. I don't believe the 2 words are compatible. Yous either take information technology or yous get information technology. I got it yesterday. I have it today. Have got is a sloppy, incorrect use of a combination of the 2 words.
Answer
If you lot're a teacher the issue is simple;
If your text book is in British English (BE) you teach "have got",
while,
if your text book is in American English (AE) you teach "have",
however,
if you are not working from whatsoever text volume you teach whatsoever your preference is.
Anyone who argues that "take got" is incorrect grammar is arguing that the Nowadays Perfect Simple is incorrect grammar.
In Exist "got" is the the by participle of "get", we don't use "gotten" that's an AE invention.
Reply
Y'all're incorrect that 'have got' is the Present Perfect tense. The nowadays perfect is used when something in the past is at present relevant to the present, like 'I've gotten the drinks – we can all leave now'. "I have got a sis" is neither the present perfect not the past simple; it'south basically (wrongly) using the grade of present perfect to express a by elementary meaning.
"Take got" is like a kind of grammatical Frankenstein'south monster, when yous think almost information technology.
If you say 'I've got this volume that says…', that's acceptable (in oral communication), because 'got' still implies something that is relevant to the nowadays moment (like I'm going to tell you something interesting from the book) and is usually something more than temporary. Merely to say "I've got a sister" is plainly nonsense. Information technology should exist "I have a sister". A sister is something you either have or don't.
Saying "I've got a sis" is not only redundant (1 extra discussion) and violates grammatical categories (existence neither truly by simple nor by perfect), it likewise sounds ugly. Doesn't information technology grate on your ears? Only constantly hearing the word 'got' (which is usually pronounced with a glottal stop – like 'GOK'). Today I GOK out of bed yeah, and GOK to work and so late yeah, and at present I've GOK so much work to exercise yeah, but that's what nosotros GOKa do yeah…
I am a native English speaker, just when I went to England for the first time I was surprised at how much the word 'got' was used, and I was especially irritated by how people kept on saying 'I've got' when what they really meant is "I have".
I myself utilise 'have got' sometimes (maybe more after having lived in the Great britain for some fourth dimension), but only when in a state of affairs where it'south something relevant to something else in the present moment, and if it's something temporary rather than permanent – and I only ever ever employ it in speech, never in writing.
To the person who said that 'accept got' is 'used naturally by most all native speakers' – that is just not true.
Reply
I agree with Kathy.
Respond
Cheers Kathy. So the fact that take got is used naturally by nearly all native speakers (I wonder if you yourself take NEVER uttered the words, "I've got to pick upwardly the kids from schoolhouse") has no outcome on your belief that information technology is "sloppy" and "incorrect"?
Reply
I've got to exercise something is different from the have got possession form, because the former goes with a verb and the latter goes with a noun.
I've got a headache. (a headache is a substantive)
I've got to pick up the kids from school. (choice up is a verb) (verb phrase)
I've got a auto or I have a automobile is just a deviation betwixt Be and AE. The Americans tend to utilise I have and the Brits I accept got. In the British sense, the got part could be seen equally the past of get, and means that you already have got something so you already own it, it is at that place with you lot at present. It suggests that at sometime or other you really went out and bought a auto for example, or that y'all take lived with 'a brother' (I've got a brother) for onetime.
We utilise both forms all the time nevertheless nosotros just don't think about it… in fact, if you start thinking most it, you start to wonder whether it is correct, but it is! You can say I've got a new firm or I have a new house, information technology'south the aforementioned affair.
Finally, gotten is an American thing… although at that place are similarities in the idea with the British accept got information technology is used in the present perfect in American English… he has gotten himself into trouble.
Reply
Information technology'due south not really so much a case of BrE and AmE, I think. Information technology's more than to do with spoken and written language. We tend to write I have…, merely say I've got… However, information technology is true that Americans say I have…, while British people say I've got… more often. You can yet often hear Americans proverb I've got… and Brits saying I have… though!
Reply
Hullo, I'm slightly worried most all the posts bashing the use of have got.
I've got black hair or
She's got a big olfactory organ.
These are both natural and perfectly correct, Not sloppy and incorrect!
Past the mode – I've a motorcar is definitely a large no-no and something we would want our students to avoid… I challenge the anonymous poster to find a credible example! Seems like some people need to re-consult their grammar reference books…
Just my two cents ;-)
Reply
If it is correct:
She/He'due south got a car
Or
Jane's got a motorcar
Is it also correct or non if I say
They've got a automobile
Or
James and Jane've got a car
???
Respond
Hi Raffaele
Yep, these are right:
"They've got a car."
"James and Jane have got a auto" (it's not mutual to apply the contraction for this ane).
Reply
I e'er focus on the fact that the utilize of have and have got differs more in the form rather than in the function – it's a grammer issue. I betoken out for instance that take, like most other verbs needs an aux verb for the negative and interrogative forms and that accept got doesn't. I likewise like to highlight the fact that take got whenever possible should use brusque forms (I've got / he's got) and have should always use the full forms (I have, he has, etc).
Reply
Hello to anybody. We, English teachers in Spain, are suposed to teach Have GOT rather than HAVE and information technology is shown in all grammer books we use in our schools. I agree with Jon (two posts in a higher place) and with the fact that we apply total forms of HAVE and curt forms of HAVE GOT.
Reply
Paul, regardless if every American (myself included) is saying something incorrectly, it's still wrong… and sloppy. Anyone who actually paid attending in grammar class, knows that we Americans continually bastardize the English language. Why is this a bad thing? Accept a trip to the Us Virgin Islands and see what happens when a language is left to evolve on it's ain for a couple centuries. You lot can hardly empathise what the native people are saying.
Reply
No way Jon, John and Lucia! Right on Tai! Nosotros should feel remorse for the ESL students in Spain and in many other places. English grammer strictly states that have got is incorrect and rightly so: accept (pres) and got (past tense) should never be used together or taught as a correct usage in English, regardless of its idiomatic usage.
The formula for amalgam this blazon of sentence is present auxiliary plus past participle, not present aux. plus past tense. Jon and Lucia, exercise you teach your students to say "Today, I have saw a car or I have ate a pizza, today?" Well, if not, then please don't teach them to use take-nowadays aux. with got-past tense verb. Even though I, myself, ofttimes apply it for comic, emphatic or obvious, grammar-abandoning reasons, or, fifty-fifty, uncomplicated laziness, I would never use it in the classroom or use it when instruction, unless as an example.
We Americans once learned this throughout elementary, centre and junior loftier school. The declining of grammar usage is despicable and fifty-fifty pervades near of today'south authors. Grammer is the verbal (linguistic) machinery which helps to preserve the habit of forethought. Lucia, to respond to your quandary, "I've a car" is a possible, grammatically correct usage; notwithstanding, it's pragmatically difficult to imagine. It'southward foreseeable to be practical when many people demand to sequentially state or affirm that they have something; notwithstanding, communicating via writing, in itself, may preclude the in a higher place scenario and repeated use of I've an object.
Answer
Aaron–I submit that there is a difference in meaning between "I take got something" and "I take gotten something". The first is a matter of nowadays possession. The second is nowadays perfect, indicating that something has been received in the past. (as with your examples of "I take seen a auto" etc.) Hence the question of what exactly "have got" is, and how to teach it… You may but exist correct that this mysterious phrase is simply bad English, but I have my doubts. There are situations where it actually does seem to be the more natural utterance. (Q: "Hey! Where's my stapler?" A: "Oh lamentable. I've got it. Here."—"I have it" certain seems odd sounding in this case.)
And to Tai'due south betoken regarding the Virgin Islands and a 'language evolving on its own', that'southward a living language for y'all. Unless you're dealing with a expressionless language similar Latin, it will continue to change, evolve, or devolve. Sorry. Language tin't be permanently stock-still in a grammar book.
Answer
Well, the British grade is get-got-got and the American class is get-got-gotten. In my point of view, there's a great departure between them. It´s articulate that we´re talking about Present Perfect, which means that there'southward a connection with by and present. "I've got a car" (means that you got it at a sure fourth dimension in the past and you withal take it) Simply, if I didn´t have a motorcar and I decided to purchase one, for case, the right form at that time is: "I take a car" and not, "I´ve got a motorcar" considering in that location´s no connection with the past, just with the present.
Answer
We tin use 'have got' to speak about something very personal, something we "owe" and 'have' for something that can't last, that is not 'ours'.
I take got blond hair. (I was built-in with it, it's mine)
I accept blond hair on my jacket. (where does it come from?)
I've got a motorcar. (it's a argument about the object: a car belongs to me)
I have a car. (it's a statement about an opportunity: I can go there, or I tin drive you lot in that location.)
Reply
Even so a lot of snobbery in the English language speaking earth I run into. Have got is a perfectly valid class of speaking seeing how so many people use it. Information technology is non sloppy as it takes longer to say than just 'accept' and it is not incorrect as and so many people use it. It is not nowadays perfect either information technology is merely a special unique verb that has evolved. If you think it is incorrect you are manifestly a snob, a moron or just not a native speaker. Language changes all the fourth dimension. Recall about information technology.
Reply
I don't sympathise why people carp maxim 'I've got'. It'southward grammatically incorrect and longer and more complicated than only saying 'I've' or 'I have'. I recall that Aaron explained it well enough; there is no logical reason to say 'I've got' in any context, whether talking about the by or the present.
Reply
"I've got" as in "I've got a car" is perfectly correct. You lot may consult whatever grammar volume if you don't believe this. Information technology is very basic grammar and is rather shocking that some people on here are not aware of that. It isn't a good idea to post something on hither if y'all don't understand English grammer. Some people may exist refering to this for reference so please don't country something as fact unless you are sure.
Answer
Of course "have got" is a correct form… in that location'south no argument nearly it. It'south neither sloppy nor incorrect. It'southward rather worrying though that so many people don't seem to realise this. Permit'south leave giving communication on the English language to the professionals!
Reply
I am new to teaching English language, so this is fascinating for me! The i idea that immediately springs to listen (which i retrieve is a new one and not yet mentioned) is that using accept got instead of but have is illustrating a grammatical tautology.
I have a car (grammatically correct) I got a car (grammatically incorrect only yet conveys the information) I accept got a motorcar ??!!
I don't know whether usage of have got is correct or not. But i do know I only don't like the audio of the word got!
If the English is going to evolve in this style, so be it – but it won't be anything to exercise with me!!
I like the caption of the different implications suggested past cdelphine64…
Reply
I remember being taught at schoolhouse (in England) that to say I've got (I doubt any native speaker would say I have got?) is unnecessary, similar saying I have have. If I'thousand attempting to be 'correct' I'll say, for case, I have a car but generally every mean solar day I say I've got a car forth with the majority. I like to call up near these things though, and I'd similar to run across what others think… If I have the meaning of got to be 'acquire', then I would use I've got to mean 'I've acquired'. So information technology sounds correct to me. I've got a new automobile, I like that! Plain I've got a car meaning 'I ain/have in my possession a car', I'd rather say I have a motorcar. Personally, I believe both should be taught, as it is so mutual and people just can't agree on which is correct. ;)
Reply
So to come back to the subject – How do you teach have got? I make sure whenever pertinent, to mention differences betwixt British English and American English. Adult students nowadays require more than and more than of that kind of knowledge in gild to not get as well lost in semantics. Let'southward face up it, we are all exposed to both English. And a language, whichever it is, always evolves, be that progression or regression, it but evolves with slight changes and adaptations here and at that place. Hold, also much snobbery hither. I've got, I accept got, I accept gotten and I have are perfectly right. The use of got is just one of those exceptions that became function of the language. That 1 class that's reminiscent to a present perfect because of obvious reasons simply that's actually more than of a present. I've a car, though grammatically correct tin can easily be avoided since hardly ever used.
At the cease of the twenty-four hour period, you want to teach them applied English, and not past the book English. Unless you are teaching a linguist, to whom the intrinsic nature of these language details might be important for whatever research reasons. But then again, he or she would not necessarily enrol in an ESL grade merely maybe something more challenging. My 2 cents is, we are here to help non native speakers acquire the level of fluency needed in today'south enervating world, not to over complicate things and confuse them. Trust me: in business organisation English, the simpler the meliorate, in any manner imaginable, grammar, vocab, expressions, etc. Any non native who wishes to acquire a higher level of English, will never go for an ESL lesson with a TEFL instructor… trust me. :) I'm an absolute not native language trainer, so… really, my 2 cents merely.
Reply
In the UK, it's natural English to say I've got a auto for something you possess (no matter when you acquired it) or to limited that you caused something recently.
I got a machine is natural for something you acquired any time in the by. Nosotros don't apply it as much as Americans seem to in the slang-type sense of I have a car simply, thinking about information technology, maybe I might to do without thinking nearly it. I'm pretty sure some Londoners with thick accents would practice. But information technology'd sound like bad English language.
I accept a car is much more polite or well spoken and you won't hear it also much in the UK, except in those circumstances.
I've gotten a car, is something you won't hear too oft. I know you'd say I've gotten a motorcar (right?) only would you say He's gotten sick? We would not usually say that, but I'one thousand sure there's a few who might.
With regards to I've a car Information technology'due south another way of saying I have, which you say, so it's certainly not incorrect, simply it is used sometimes in what we telephone call 'posh' English and is sometimes used past us plebs if we're trying to make something sound more than of import (peradventure, more often, jokingly) "Don't tell me you lot've got a ticket for Bob Dylan?" "No – I've TWO tickets for Bob Dylan.". No-ane would say I've soup as a stand lonely argument, but I'yard sure some well spoken chap or chapess might say I've soup on my tuxedo/ballgown. Those people are human too and so information technology is correct, whether you like it or not.
Aaron, I've a car may be 'pragmatically hard to imagine' for you lot, just and then again then is the 24 hour clock! (Deplorable other-Americans, that was a sly dig, only only joking!)
Not trying to start a war, just just a personal niggle here, aimed at Jeremy'southward "I don't empathize why people bother saying I've got. It's grammatically incorrect and longer and more complicated than just proverb I've or I take." statement. Information technology'south what we call 'making the linguistic communication more than interesting'. Making something more complicated, or just having more available options at your disposal, tin requite language what is called… 'depth'. The sound of American English language is actually friendly and information technology'due south far from being a stupid form of the language, so don't reduce things to the level of "Allow'south use the simple-near form of everything and stick RIGIDLY to the rule volume" or we might also just phone call it a mean solar day and do "i grunt for yes, ii grunts for no" and so just point at things we want.
Reply
About "become" and "got", I agree with Aaron and Tai. "Get" is the verb in the present tense, "got" is the aforementioned verb in the by tense. To convey our message we either indicate if we are in the nowadays or in the by. Either one, but not both together. "I have a cold" is uncomplicated enough. In answer to Claudia that is a expert example of complicating matters, the Castilian language has that rule of if it's yesterday, it is said in 1 way, but if it's longer it's another word, and if it's very long, it's some other give-and-take. Now Claudia wants us to add not only the past, but if you lot all the same take it, or not, on top of all the rest. In my view "got" sure is in the past whether immediate or tardily past, or agile or passive. IT IS IN THE By. I think the dominion should employ to all verbs equally. Simply like give, gave, given, is get, got and gotten. If we brand exception for "got", so given will exist if you gave me a nowadays at a certain fourth dimension and I yet accept it, it's in the present, so it should be "give", and if I don't still have it, it should exist "gave". What kind of rule is this? This certainly has zero to do with beingness a snob, I am in total agreement that language changes to accommodate people, new words are constantly added and needed. Furthermore, I personally call up that "got" sounds too much like the word "gut". Personally I will still go along to employ the give-and-take have, had and had, it sounds so much simpler and so much nicer.
P.S. Referring to Jon who is worried about the bashing of the word "have got" with his selection of words: "she is got a big nose". I do not remember Jon should be worried anymore since he has just made Aaron'south betoken of view very clearly, that when we mix a verb in the present and a verb in the by, no matter what the verb is, it will always come out like: "I have ate a pizza" and "I have saw a car", and "She is got a big nose".
Reply
My dear fellows what a wonderfully orchestrated discussion yous have simply had. Indeed a operation of much intrigue. Now Aaron is 'no back of a clock' and so to speak and was it Martin who stamped his authority upon the strange notion of the grammar verse in question taking on a verb besides. Oh my god. The horror. What a crime. Actually i was expecting someone to provide some teaching ideas for 'accept/take got' just what i got was fantastic. I will not explain take/have got equally is likewise cumbersome and futile to go over once more and again. The merely affair that fascinates me is that possibly all of you are making a living out of didactics the English linguistic communication but most of you fail to realise that some grammar points do not obey the rules. I nearly laughed when someone tried to painstakingly deduce that 'the present' is not allowed to become with 'the by' ecetera ecetera and what nigh the inclination of the 'present perfect' being the role of this grammer point all forth like from the very offset. I near moisture myself. It was comedy gold. Thank you so much.
Mail service scriptum: Why is English mispronouced in America. Again the phonetics are not derived from the expect of the words. The language must exist heard to be spoken. Is this a deliberate human activity of independence?
Answer
Have none of you lot (with the exception of Dr Moran, of course) ever heard of Swan's Applied English Usage? If yous had you would see that grammer is not a matter of right and wrong, simply of what people actually practice with language.
In that location are so many completely wrong posts that information technology would be difficult to know where to outset if it weren't for AARON's blaze of ignorance lighting the way. I love his formula:
"The formula for constructing this type of sentence is present auxiliary + by participle, non present aux. + past tense."
Trouble is, Aaron my dear, that the simple by tense and the by participle ARE THE SAME Matter FOR A REGULAR VERB – eg. work, worked, worked and in Brit English the by participle of 'get' is 'got', but equally the simple past is likewise 'got'. That'south only uncomplicated ignorance of another form of the linguistic communication, But when he says:
"English grammar strictly states that 'take got' is incorrect and rightly so: 'accept'(pres) and 'got'(by) should never be used together or taught equally a correct usage in English, regardless of its idiomatic usage."
He is truly out on a limb since IT'South Only Not TRUE!
I've got a dozen or and so instruction methods that innovate I accept got within the first few units and got(past), it just shows he has no thought what a British irregular verb table looks like, (rather than for the US) 'got' is both past tense and past participle. On this particular betoken, the difference between Am and Br is simply that (British) IRREGULAR verb to go has a dissimilar past participle to the one he has learnt. For united states of america got is both the past tense and the past participle. Has he ever heard a British person use the past perfect expression I had gotten? Of grade not = we had got, but like we still have got, a different way of doing it.
If you don't want to teach that the nowadays perfect is besides used to depict possession in this example considering it confuses you lot or considering you don't think your students need to know that'due south fine. Please don't, notwithstanding, say that English grammar strictly states that 'accept got' is incorrect and rightly so when that is just not the case.
Language tin be used to describe reality from whatsoever number of dissimilar perspectives and the difference between I have and I accept got is no more a change of perspective on the same attribute of reality. When it comes to how to teach information technology, nevertheless, that's an entirely different matter and I never did work out a satisfactory method. Some students just 'become it' and others, who possibly share some of Aaron's less agile cognitive processes, merely don't go it and never will.
The English verb structure is based on the post-obit binary elements:
Negative/positive
Past/not past
Modal/no modal
Perfect/non perfect
Progressive/not progressive
Passive/not passive.
By switching on and off each element y'all can create all possible verb forms: I work = nowadays – so there is no past, no negative, no modal, no perfect, no progressive and no passive, all that remains is subject and verb in the present tense (although the total form withal has an auxiliary which we will demand to utilize for past and negative forms – I do work).
Past switching these elements on one-by-1 we tin make the following constructions, not all of which describe actual possible situations for any given verb, depending on the meaning of the verb:
I work null = I work (which is the aforementioned every bit 'I do work')
I piece of work negative = I don't work
I work past = I did work
I work by negative = I didn't work
I piece of work modal = I would work
I work past negative modal = I wouldn't piece of work
I work perfect = I have worked
I work perfect past negative modal = I wouldn't have worked
I work progressive = I am working
I work progressive perfect by negative modal = I wouldn't have been working
I work passive = I am worked
I work passive progressive perfect by negative modal = I wouldn't accept been being worked (yeah, honestly, you actually can do that and information technology's nonetheless only 1 verb).
Plain, all the intervening combinations are also possible (e.g present perfect progressive 'I have been watching' etc.). The hard role is conceptualizing the logical situations in which such constructions are necessary.
In the case of the present perfect used every bit a possessive – this is to KATHY in particular – have is not inherently passive. A passive construction is 1 in which the auxiliary to exist straight precedes a by participle (for case, the book WAS WRITTEN or you lot ARE Browbeaten) take is neither a part of the verb 'to be' nor a past participle, ergo the only passive construction 'have' tin be function of must be a PERFECT PASSIVE structure (with or without modals, negatives, past tenses etc.) since y'all tin use the have to change exist into been and then follow that with a past participle, for example, I have been beaten – a present perfect passive construction, however, I have beaten is only ever going to exist active because at that place'due south no part of the verb to be in the construction. Indeed Kathy, practice you actually know what passive means in this context? Information technology means that the role of subject and object are reversed. That ways that the person or object that performs the verb comes after it not before (if it comes at all) and that the person or object that comes before the verb has that verb done to it. Very different from concept behind nowadays perfect which controls the relationship betwixt field of study and verb over time, rather than the decision-making whether the subject does the verb or has the verb washed to information technology.
Yous say: "You either have it or you get it". "I got information technology yesterday". "I accept it today." – Do you seriously mean I can't become it today and I couldn't accept had it yesterday? That actually is bizarre. Y'all're confusing the verbs' semantic content (what they hateful) with their usage in compound verb forms as or with auxiliaries have tin be used as both auxiliary and root verb, whereas 'go' cannot exist used equally an auxiliary. That's why y'all can say I had had without Microsoft Word underlining information technology in cherry to propose that you delete the repeated word.
Are y'all guys really teaching English?
The divergence betwixt Am and Br is simply that our IRREGULAR verb 'to go' has a unlike past participle to the one he has learnt (that'south different likewise – he probably thinks he'due south learned it).
Reply
Why teach this every bit a separate subject, when it'southward conspicuously most simple nowadays tense and present perfect tense? The have in accept got is not a common verb, equally suggested past the first annotate. It'due south an auxiliary verb, and the very ordinary auxiliary verb for perfect tenses. Information technology doesn't accept a meaning of its own. I can't understand why you go through all the trouble of teaching negative and flexion in tenses and everything… when information technology's just well-nigh following the usual, simple rules of verbal tenses, with perchance one or 2 exceptions.
Answer
Divide the form into 2 groups, one-half the students are coppers, the other half witnesses. The constabulary officers are given a few minutes to think of questions to enquire the witnesses near several notorious suspects. Each witness is given a color photograph of a different suspect (male or female, with bristles, moustache, brusque or long hair…). The witnesses must memorise the photo (younger or lower level students may take notes) and after a few minutes give them back to the instructor. The teacher sticks the pictures (preferably with other similar ones) on the lath (with bluetac) at the "police station board". Then each "copper" must discover a "witness" and question them about their "suspect". With the notes taken (nigh eye and hair colour, physical traits, etc.) each "law officeholder" must then go back to the lath and try to find the pic plumbing equipment the clarification they got. The winner is the showtime copper to identify the "suspect" and written report to the "chief" (the teacher). The "witness" must confirm identification. Activeness takes nigh 25 minutes (depending on group) My students loved it! Every bit a follow-upwardly, students may invent details / a story almost the crime committed by each "suspect", human activity out the abort, etc. You certain tin can come upwardly with lots of ideas!
Reply
In Canada, we use both I take and I have got. The difference betwixt the two is ordinarily referring to a temporary situation or a permanent one. For example:
I've got some time
I've got 20 dollars (temporary)
I have two brothers
I have long hair (permanent)
Reply
I've always idea of this equally a Brit/U.s.a. matter, and it's strange that people aren't aware of this. Mind to any Brit speak, and s/he volition say have got much more than than have.
Too, an American will say both, simply will tend to say have more than have got. Certain dialects of AmE will also use the nonstandard I got for I have, only whether this is an abomination or simply a facet of a non-prestige language is another debate.
It's also worth noting that Americans very rarely use have got in negative or question forms. I've got a motorcar is commonly heard here in the US, but have you got a car? and I haven't got a automobile, while hands understood, sound a fleck forced and pretentious to American ears.
Of class, both take and take got are used in the imperative sense, equivalent to "must." Interestingly, in AmE (not certain about BrE), we seem to use have got in this context when we want to add emphasis, for example: You accept GOT to see this movie. You Take to see this movie works too, merely it just doesn't sound as forceful. Also, you'd well-nigh never hear the negative or question forms of take got used in this context (I don't have to go to work today is mutual, whereas I haven't got to go to work today doesn't sound quite right to me.
At the finish of the 24-hour interval, both have and have got are acceptable, prescriptivist snobbery notwithstanding. In my experience English learners aren't really interested in these sorts of BrE / AmE differences (at least at the lower levels), and the verbal subtleties of usage tin become pretty convoluted. I would just teach them both as equally right means of saying the same matter, but make certain to exist clear that have got can merely be used in the present simple.
Respond
It seems that some of you are of the opinion that have got (to mean have) is but "lazy" and/or "wrong". Furthermore, it seems that no amount of evidence to the contrary would convince you otherwise. Seriously, delight stop spreading misinformation. Information technology's your goddamn job to teach English as it IS spoken, not as you would accept it spoken. English grammar did not come downwards on freaking stone tablets from heaven. It'southward what's embodied in the actual speech patterns of the people who use English language, nothing more. (Side note: Different speech communication or writing communities have different practices, and there are practical social consequences to following different standards.)
My personal approach to teaching accept got (since that was what the OP was originally requesting) would be to say that it's just a synonym for the present tense of have. Furthermore, it'southward usually realized in the contracted grade, as in I've got way too much time on my hands. In even more breezy contexts, it the "ve" can be elided and you lot get the (cringeworthy, to my ear) I got way as well much time on my hands. I would and so betoken out that the usage is primary oral rather than written, and that in essays or other formal writing, information technology would exist better to use have (lest your essay be drenched in red ink).
P.S. In my (great-lakes Us) dialect, at least, for I've got to exist the present perfect of become, it would need to be I've gotten. Just my 2 cents.
Reply
Using accept got when information technology ways elementary ownership is plain lazy. I'VE GOT A Motorcar vs. I HAVE A CAR….I Have A Machine is correct. Nosotros have gotten lazy and laziness becomes the norm. I've got a motorcar is easier to say than I have a car. Try it, it is true. The incorrect version has been used so often that even grammarians don't know what the correct usage is any longer. Language evolves, and it often evolves out of constantly repeating an error. "Got milk?" This question is grammatically incorrect. The question really is Do you lot have milk? Have you got cheating on your mind? Wrong. Practise you lot have cheating on your mind? Right. This error has get and so commonplace that it has get acceptable. This is sad, actually. This goes to show you lot that anyone tin change language by only repeating errors. What happened to rules? Someone has to know how to use grammer correctly, and correct grammar should be used, peculiarly in formal communication between companies and nations. Incorrect usage makes one look actually, really featherbrained.
Reply
Jane — "What happened to rules?"
Rules DID NOT COME Starting time! Spoken language did not, nor does not, come from or originate from rules. Rules are an reconsideration……simply an endeavor to codify a given language after information technology has taken form. The only time the Rule Book can exist airtight and prepare in stone is with a dead language (or at least until we find new manuscripts and new usages of dead languages.) Every bit languages evolve, so do rules. Imagine an English language Grammar book in 500 years. I personally believe American English language will evolve into some form of Spanglish that volition boss the mural.
I teach ESL to level 1 adult students attempting to learn to speak and understand English. It is not a linguistic setting or grammer class. Information technology is a class on conversational English. Therefore, I never, never introduce grammar into the equation when pedagogy take got. Why not? simply read this thread!… In addition, it is irrelevant to agreement what your boss is asking yous. You gotta work visa?
I take two post graduate degrees with heavy linguistic accent. I teach, study and live an bookish life. I am anything only lazy… It is Non Laziness to speak with shortened, grammically incorrect words and sentences. The point is to convey understanding through oral expression…if someone asks me if I take a car, I typically say, Yeah, i gotta car. My SOLE objective being to convey the thought of my personal motorcar ownership. Shortening a thought in verbal communication is non lazy. It is efficient, effective and time-saving. It allows for more fourth dimension to advance the conversation to new topics. Information technology allows one to audio similar a "normal" human being in breezy social settings rather than a loftier-browed, elitist, academic stiff. Or perchance to demonstrate not-lazy, exact communication, we should respond, "Aye, I am the owner of an automobile" Problem of have, have got solved!
Reply
It is simple as I see it.
Accept is used as a main verb for possession. It is also used equally an auxiliary verb in the nowadays perfect.
Have got is present perfect, because got is (sorry Americans), the normally used by participle of go in English English language. However, deplorable to disagree with anybody hither, we English too sometimes use gotten besides, and the pregnant is slightly divergent…
Have got is used for acquisition. Nosotros can employ it to say I've got blue eyes, considering the idea that we caused the colour, and the eyes, is charming, and kind of true, nosotros have inherited them from our parents. The aforementioned is true for all kinds of instances where possession might seem, at first glance, to better adjust the situation, and information technology may well be that Brits much overuse take got, and that have might often be more elegant.
Have gotten is used for the lengthy or troublesome conquering of something.
I've gotten my knickers in a twist.
He'south gone and gotten himself arrested.
I've never really gotten to the end of Ulysses.
It's rare but we use it this way, and have been doing and so for quite some time. Search Shakespeare (those of you who say have got is simply wrong and for 'idiots', bear in heed you're calling Shakespeare an idiot), and you will find examples of have, have got, and have gotten, befitting with the usage I take described.
Reply
I find it difficult to believe that at that place is an argument over whether have got or have is right. Both forms are perfectly adequate! If you've never gone outside the US, logically you won't be every bit accustomed to hearing or seeing it. I am American teaching English away. As a teacher, you should not just recognize that dialects vary effectually the world (in more than than just English), but yous should virtually certainly teach this fact!
Accept got is non a "sloppy" brew-up of ii words. It has the same significant as our accept, but it is treated every bit an irregular verb. Americans tend to use it less and simply practice not teach as the correct form in OUR dialect. Saying that it's wrong is similar telling a Brit that saying "at weekends" is wrong (other countries exercise not say "on" weekends… or pronounce the letter "Z" as Americans exercise, for that matter). The fact is that it is non wrong — it is simply non what nosotros are used to in this hemisphere.
Please, to those of you lot who are calling accept got sloppy or incorrect, before you lot make upward your mind on the subject, please exercise a chip of traveling (or travelling, in British English language).
Answer
I've got a degree. I have it, I earned it, I achieved information technology.
I have long legs. I did nothing to get them, they are an innate role of my physiognomy.
He's got lots of money. He either earned it or inherited it, nobody has a fat wallet on their person every bit they are expelled from the womb.
He has a nice personality. which would appear to exist an intrinsic feature.
To go – to obtain, to reach
To take – a verb of general possession
Answer
Interesting thread – I vaguely remember my sometime English teacher years ago wrinkling her nose disapprovingly at the employ of accept got in writing, but these days just about everybody I know uses this form – and it is formally taught in all French schools to signal possession I've got blue optics, a brother, a big house etc. The older English class of the past participle, gotten, once used in 'English' English, now appears to exist virtually exclusively used past speakers of American English, only I stand to be corrected! In my stance, if enough people consistently apply a certain mode of speaking, this eventually validates it – even if it causes the purists amongst usa to shudder. Witness the more than colourful additions to the dictionary every year.
Answer
In all school books (for non-native speakers who want to learn British English), information technology is stated that nosotros should use have got for possessions. Personally, I prefer have – a lot of people use information technology and for me information technology's easier to pronounce. So in my view, discussion about which is better, more than proper, etc, is pointless. Nosotros can use have got and have – both are pop and correct, and both should exist taught in schools.
Answer
As it has been argued dorsum and forth that both are apparently 'correct', I won't annotate on that. It'southward becoming (getting?) Wearisome to notice out which is technically correct – which is what I came to this folio to discover. I really can't believe that there is no definitive answer in terms of a teaching rule (irrespective of everyday / common usage – which as we have heard, varies from location to location and class to class and didactics level to education level!).
What I will say though, is regarding Redundancy. Surely the point is to exist able to convey a message or significant as economically and efficiently as possible (unless of course you purposefully want to add breadth and depth to your language for literary/poetic issue). Therefore 'got' is redundant. It adds nothing to the overall meaning, then get rid of it. Trim the fat – like y'all would an infected appendix. Americans seem to be more than likely to do this trimming…
For a not-English speaker learning English for the first fourth dimension, surely it is easier / more than straightforward for them learn 'I have' rather than 'I have got' (which opens up a whole complicated tin of worms regarding mashed-upwards tenses and irregularities etc.)?
As an British/English native myself, I much adopt SAYING the (apparently) more 'American' 'I have…'. To me, it sounds amend.
For WRITTEN purposes, 'I take got a/some + noun' looks plain wrong and clumsy, then I also prefer to write 'I have…'
It would be useful to know if students are penalised one fashion or the other for these alternative usages – considering to win the game, information technology helps to know how to play the game! I bet this varies from place to place, examiner to examiner!
Ultimately, I recall information technology's important to inform your students that both versions are commonly and widely used (and therefore acceptable) and that they should use whichever feels more comfortable to them. Students need to be aware that both are used – because they WILL encounter them both!
Question: Is it more polite to respond to someone'due south question using the same course, for example:
Do y'all accept a motorcar?
Yes I have a motorcar (or) No, I don't take a automobile
Accept y'all got a car?
Aye, I've got a automobile (or) No, I haven't got a car.
Would you lot mix them? Thoughts anyone?
End note: 'I have got to (practice something)' is surely an entirely different use of language relating to necessity/imperative/must?
Reply
Discussion of "correct" and "incorrect" grammar seems a bit out of identify in ESL, whose task is surely to re-create usage, not to dictate it. However you may experience about the elegance or otherwise of "have got" versus "have", information technology's perchance worth noting that the former produces more understandable spoken English, as Gs are difficult to slur. Compare the relative intelligibility of "Nosotros've no fuel left" and "We've got no fuel left". Could be a lifesaver.
Reply
whoa, I am a non native speaker, and really amused reading all these comments virtually yep u can or no u tin can't. Why is it wrong or why isn't it wrong to utilise it… every teacher has a dissimilar stance if u should or shouldn't use it. Americans say "have" English say "have got", both right i guess in speaking, just use the one you like, that'southward all, no 1 is a moron for using one or the other, it is upwards to yous. The funny role is that some people here think that English language is the incorrect one to use. I have been living in U.k. for 25 years and no ane told me it was wrong and I accept spent fourth dimension in America too and no one told me i was saying information technology incorrect either.
Reply
we employ have for breathing, and have got for inanimate.
Reply
I agree with Stephen, "correct" and "wrong" really aren't the way to go. "have" and "take got" mean basically the same thing, except when it's BrE and you lot're talking virtually what nosotros talk about when we say "take gotten" in that location is a SLIGHT difference in formality/politeness, non even worthy of caption.
"have" is used for disease, sure, but so is "am/are/is having" (a stroke, a seizure, a migraine HEADACHE, a fit) – it's unusual to say I'g having cancer (what, this morning?) or I'm having a headache (delivered?)… but information technology's not wrong, especially when plural (I'one thousand having headaches, chills)
If you lot're not sure, and then use get "i'm getting, i got, i've got"
your lessons should be more descriptive and less proscriptive
Reply
Please aid me , which of the following sentences is correct :
one- Do you lot e'er have fourth dimension to go to London?
2- Have yous ever got time to get to London?
3- Do you have fourth dimension to go to London this weekend?
4- Have y'all got time to become to London this weekend?
I appreciate if you assist me in this regrad.
Respond
Farid
1- Do yous always have time to go to London?
This is correct.
2- Have you ever got time to get to London?
This is correct simply sounds less natural than the offset sentence. One context where it does sound natural would be in this dialogue:
John: "I haven't got time to go to London."
Bob: "Take you ever got fourth dimension to get to London?"
Bob emphasises the word "always" in his reply.
3- Do you accept fourth dimension to go to London this weekend?
This is correct.
4- Have you got time to become to London this weekend?
This is right.
Reply
I don't take got a brother.
I have not got a brother.
which one is correct from the previous sentence.
I appreciate f you lot aid me.
Reply
"I have not got a brother" is right.
Reply
Have got slightly shows equally someone has recently got something. For example, Ive got a motorcar suggests that I didn't have whatever car in the past and recently bought it or got it. Whereas I accept a motorcar means the person has already a automobile and the time of getting the car is indefinite
Reply