Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: i'll come back home

i hope you'll be all on time, in other case i'll come back home, i have
not "tempo da perdere"
E' giusta la frase e voi come lo tradurreste "tempo da perdere"?
Maybe "i have not time to spend"?
Thanks 

"apo" <apo...@inwindTOGLIMI.it> ha scritto nel messaggio 
news:pan.2005.01.04....@inwindTOGLIMI.it...

I hope you'll be all on time, otherwise I'll come back home. I've got no 
time to waste. 

Cciovi ha scritto:

Or, with a slightly less negative sense: "...I've got no time to lose."
-- 
This is my opinion of modern, colloquial, *conversational* American
English. 
If you feel the need to e-mail me, un-not my address first.

 Or, with a slightly less negative sense: "...I've got no time to lose.
i've never understood when i have to use "i've got" and when only "i've".
Is it a serious mistake?



You might want to have a look at a recent thread, "Forma negativa di have". 
In the affirmative, you can use either "I've got" or "I have" (or "I've",
in BritEng); in the negative and in the interrogative, things are more
complicated, but you'd better use either "got" or do-forms of "have".
Bye, FB
-- 
Emily: "I'm going to Europe and I'm going to have a marvellous time. I'm
going to get up at ten and have two glasses of wine at lunch every single
day."
Richard: "Only prostitutes have two glasses of wine at lunch!"
(Gilmore Girls, 501)

apo ha scritto:

There may be some differences in use between BrEng and AmEng, but let's see
how I can explain it.
"I've" (=I have) used with a past participle indicates the present perfect:
(I've read that book. I've seen that movie.)
It can also be used, colloquially, with "got" to mean "I have/I possess":
I've got (I have) that book in my library. I've got (I have) a VCR.
When used with "got to" it means "I must."
I've got to (I must) remember to do my homework. I've got to (I must) go;
I'm late.
"I've got to <+ infinitive>" and "I have to <+ infinitive>" both mean "I
must".
The direct answer to your question is that in AmEng, "I've" is almost never
used alone (with the sense of "I possess"):
E.g.: "I've that book in my library" is not wrong and you would be
understood, but it's not common.
HTH!


Really?  I've never heard that (I've got no time to lose).  
bye
ari


Yes  - haven't got round to considering it fully yet , but here I'd say 
'I've no time to waste' (after all , if I've no time to waste why spend it 
uttering unnecessary words like 'got' ?)
Mike (UK) 

Giņ
A man has dreams of walking with giants,
to carve his niche in the edifice of time.
Before the mortar of his zeal
has a chance to congeal
the cup is dashed from his lips,
the flame is snuffed aborning.

Non ho tempo da perdere, quindi = time to waste, o time to loose
Ops. lose, non loose.


Giò


Mike Brewer ha scritto:

LOL. GP! (=Good Point)
Except that for a Yank, the time involved in the thought process required
to "make the comment more efficient, less time-consuming" would be longer
than the time involved in saying "I've got..." :)


 than the time involved in saying "I've got..." :)
I take that back.
(Except for the fact that it took me eleven minutes to think of this,) we
frequently utter the statement as:
"I got no time to lose."



I hope you'll all be on time, otherwise I'll go home. I've got no time
to waste.
"Go home" č piů corretto di "come back home" perché la persona che parla
non č a casa.
"I've got no time to waste" č abbastanza maleducato, ma anche in
italiano lo č, mi sembra.
-- 
Mary

 italiano lo è, mi sembra.
As Joey has written, "I've (got) not time to lose" is less rude, isn't it?
Maybe it can be translated as "Non c'è tempo da perdere".
P.S. How about "I can afford to lose no time", or something like that?
Bye, FB
-- 
After a year of speculation, inventor Dean Kamen unveiled his mysterious
"It", which is a battery-powered two-wheel people mover. Many believe it
will completely revolutionize the way people get hit by cars.
(Saturday Night Live)

 P.S. How about "I can afford to lose no time", or something like that?
"I can't afford to waste any time" is marginally less rude than "I've
got no time to waste".
-- 
Mary