Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: to do e to have

ero convinto che con to have non si usasse l'ausiliare to do.
Invece Google mi traduce "(Daniel) does not have an idea for this wall. 
He apologizes".
 
Sono ignorante? O sto perdendo la memoria?
In verità non so quale delle due ipotesi sarebbe da preferire :/ Forse 
che sono ignorante.
 
 

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:28:08 -0400, Daniel NA wrote
(in article <mn.dbdc7db9ebde2153.121580@daniel-na>):

You might be "mis-remembering." :)
The sentence you quoted is perfectly normal AmE, although in normal speech it 
would be
"Daniel doesn't have an idea for this wall..."
 
The form with "hasn't" sounds formal to me; I would guess it's a British 
version, although it's not *too* unusual for AmE.
"Daniel hasn't an idea.."
 
-- 
Joey from New York
Remember: It is To Laugh
 
Among those whom I like or admire, I can find no common denominator,
but among those whom I love, I can:
all of them make me laugh.
   -- WH Auden
 

 "Daniel hasn't an idea.."
 
I think they say "Daniel hasn't got an idea...".
 
Kiuhnm

):

Yes, although that's a different verb altogether ('get' as opposed to 'have') 
it's perfectly colloquial in AmE.


 He apologizes".
 
Here's what Swan's "Practical English Usage" says about it.
 
In American English and modern British English, questions and negatives 
are commonly formed with /do/.
   Does the house have a garden?
   Her parents did not have very much money.
 
Short questions and negative forms (e.g. Have you...?, she has not) were 
common in older English. In modern English they are rather formal and 
uncommon (except in a few fixed expressions like /I haven't the faintest 
idea/). They are not normally used in American English.
- Have you an appointment? (formal BrE only)
   Do you have an appointment? (AmE/BrE)
- Angela has not the charm of her older sisters. (formal BrE only)
   Angela does not have the charm... (AmE/BrE)
 
In conversation and informal writing, we often use the double form /have 
got/.
   I've got a new boyfriend. (More natural in speech than /I have a new 
boyfriend/.)
   Has your sister got a car?  I hanve't got your keys.
Note that /have got/ means exactly the same as /have/ in this case - it 
is a present tense of /have/, not the present perfect of /get/.
 
Kiuhnm

):
 
There has always been a lot of discussion over the use of 'have got' (and 
'have gotten.')
 
In the following, it's stated that "I've gotten the answer" and "I've gotten 
plenty" are not allowed in American English. Wrong. He doesn't make it clear 
that it's only not allowed in the sense of 'to have,' and I can see where a 
student of English might be misled. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
If he meant they're not allowed (or 'used' would be a better way to put it) 
in the sense of 'to have,' then I agree. But they are used in the sense of 
'to get.'
 
"Every time I've asked for a favor I've gotten the answer that it's out of 
the question."
 
"I've gotten plenty of rejections over the years."
 
<quote - it's long, but so was your selection :-P)
 
Here's what David Crystal says about The gotten/got distinction in
The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language (p.311):
 
"Gotten is probably the most distinctive of all the AmE/BrE grammatical
 differences, but British people who try to use it often get it wrong.
 It is not simply an alternative for have got.  Gotten is used in such
 contexts as 
    They've gotten a new boat.   (= obtain)
    They've gotten interested.   (= become)
    He's gotten off the chair.   (= moved)
 But it is not used in the sense of possession (= have).  AmE does not
 allow
   *I've gotten the answer.
or *I've gotten plenty.
 but uses I've got as in informal BrE.  The availability of gotten
 does however mean that AmE can make such distinctions as the following:
    They've got to leave  (they must leave) vs
    They've gotten to leave  (they've managed to leave)."
 
I'd add that Crystal's I've gotten the answer isn't starred if it means I 
have figured out the answer, rather than I have the answer.
 
The key is the overlap between the Possessive use of have and the Perfect use 
of have, plus the fact that one of the senses of get is come to have. If one 
has come to have a cold, for instance, then one has a cold, and the AmE usage 
of has got means that one is currently infested, due to the present relevance 
aspect of the Perfect. This is so common that kids regularly use got without 
have or even -'ve to mean have, and young kids even think it's the regular 
verb for possession, as witness such constructions as He gots new shoes.
 
Faced with the overwhelming interpretation of (ha)ve got as simply have, AmE 
has reinvigorated an old past participle gotten to be used whenever other, 
non-possessive forms of get are intended.
 
If one is simply speaking of the acquisition of something, for instance, 
rather than the current possession, one says I've gotten ..... in AmE since 
I've got implies that one still has it, and therefore focusses on the current 
Possession rather than the Perfective acquisition. And all of the idiomatic 
uses of get, like the get-Passive of get married, the Inchoative become/come 
to be inherent in get tired, the Concessive of get to go that Crystal 
mentions, etc. use gotten as their participle. Whereas any construction, even 
an idiomatic one like have to (= must) where one can use have equally well, 
use got as the participle.
 
Weird, but that's English for you. 
<endquote>
 
After sifting through this, I've gotten a headache and now I've got a 
headache.


 "I've gotten plenty of rejections over the years."
 
I think that Swan agrees with you. Or am I missing something?
 
Kiuhnm

Daniel NA martedì 27/09/2011 writes "to do e to have" in 
it.cultura.linguistica.inglese.
 
grazie per le vostre risposte / commenti :-)
Mi sembra di capire che farei bene a procurarmi "Practical English 
Usage" di M. Swan.
 
Buon fine settimana :-)