# Gross abuses of the English language **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 13, 2003, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991 "2003-05-13T17:11:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/101 "2003-05-16T09:40:02Z")
**dan** - Yes, I understand that…it’s just that I feel as if “have got” should be exempt from the usual “got” prejudices, and certainly all the ESL books I’ve ever seen teach it as a normal English construction – which it is. The usage is just much more common on the other side of the pond. I just don’t understand why “got” is such a maligned word. Why does it offend so? It’s hardly in the same category as “thing” or “it.” “Got” has a very specific meaning. It’s the past tense of “get” (in most cases. Not in the “have got” construction, though.) Why not the prejudice against other one-syllable past tense verbs? What about “gave”? Let’s strike that as empty and ambiguous, and use words like “bequeathed,” “dispensed,” “provided,” or “transfered” in its stead. Silliness, I tells ya. ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/102 "2003-05-16T11:07:37Z")
By the way, one of the funniest (unintentionally) promoters of the misuse of “literally” was Gorilla Monsoon, who used to do color commentary for the WWF on their Saturday morning wrestling shows. One of his best was “they’re literally hanging from the rafters here!” ---
**Author:** ![ArtyDooDoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/13edae/32.png) [@ArtyDooDoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ArtyDooDoo)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/103 "2003-05-16T14:41:51Z")
I seen a pitcher I want to by. ---
**Author:** ![lovelyluka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f475e1/32.png) [@lovelyluka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lovelyluka)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/104 "2003-05-16T15:15:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pulykamell \* > **Umm…your teacher’s right. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that usage, so far as I can see. The construction “have got” is perfectly OK, as in “have you got any change.” It’s more widely used in UK English, but Americans certainly use it, as your example shows.** My understanding is that the AOL phrase should be, “You have _gotten_ mail” - I don’t remember exactly the conjugation of the verb “get”, but I think it’s “get, got, have gotten, are getting”. At least that’s what I remember being drilled into me. So it should be “You got mail” or “You’ve gotten mail”. Not that I’m advocating them saying that. “Have you gotten any change?” just sounds weird, too. Now that I reread my post, I’ve come to this conclusion…This _has gotten_ ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/105 "2003-05-16T15:25:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pulykamell \* > **I just don’t understand why “got” is such a maligned word. Why does it offend so? It’s hardly in the same category as “thing” or “it.” “Got” has a very specific meaning. It’s the past tense of “get” (in most cases. Not in the “have got” construction, though.)** IANA English major, but I’ll take a crack at this. “Got” is not only the past tense of “get,” but the past participle (“gotten” is a variant form). All of the following constructions are correct: You get mail = you receive mail. You got mail = you received mail. You’ve got (gotten) mail = you have received mail. “You’ve got” looks wrong to people who think the past participle of “get” should always be “gotten”. Also, they may be overgeneralizing from cases in which “have got” is incorrect or redundant. “You’ve got a long a way to go” should be “You have a long way to go.” “The committee has got complaints” should mean the committee has received complaints but is likely to be understood as meaning the committee is complaining, so careful speakers are likely to prefer another verb, such as “heard” or “raised”, depending on the intended meaning. It may not always be clear whether or not “got” is redundant. To use a particularly geeky citation, when Bilbo asked, “What have I got in my pocket?”, he could have merely asked, “What have I in my pocket?” But maybe what he meant was, “What have I acquired in my pocket,” which suited the circumstance. ---
**Author:** ![lovelyluka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f475e1/32.png) [@lovelyluka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lovelyluka)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/106 "2003-05-16T15:32:31Z")
Does anyone have a recent cite for all this get-got-gotten business? I’ve gotten (I got, I’ve got) into the spirit of things 😉 ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/107 "2003-05-16T15:41:42Z")
[www.reference.com](http://www.reference.com) and its subsite [www.dictionary.com](http://www.dictionary.com) are decent starting points for word-related questions. ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/108 "2003-05-16T15:43:31Z")
Sheesh. Why didn’t they just say, “You have mail”? Simple, effective. There’s no reason to drag “got” into the sentence. None at all. ---
**Author:** ![godzillatemple](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/49beb7/32.png) [@godzillatemple](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godzillatemple)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/109 "2003-05-16T15:48:47Z")
For that matter, why do we say things like “come over here” instead of simply “come here”? I don’t think this whole “have got” thing is a gross abuse of the English language – it’s just the way English is. I’m more worried about instances where people use words or phrases incorrectly, or in a manner exactly opposite to the actual meaning. Barry ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/110 "2003-05-16T15:54:42Z")
Different connotations. Compare “you’re mail was delivered” and “your mail has been delivered.” ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/111 "2003-05-16T15:55:51Z")
Your mail was delivered.:smack: ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/112 "2003-05-16T16:05:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TWDuke \* > \*\*Different connotations. Compare “you’re mail was delivered” and “your mail has been delivered.” \*\* Denotations, actually. Two different tenses. But “have” and “got” are definitely pretty much the same thing. If you have it, you got it. If you got it, you have it. It’s dumb to repeat yourself when there’s no reason to do so. Also, your examples are in the passive voice, whereas the actual “You’ve got mail” is in the active voice. “You have mail” is what it’s telling you. It’s not saying, “Your mail has been delivered.” ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/113 "2003-05-16T16:09:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dantheman \* > \*\*Sheesh. Why didn’t they just say, “You have mail”? > > Simple, effective. There’s no reason to drag “got” into the sentence. None at all. \*\* Maybe people think it sounds better? More importantly, who cares why they say it the way they do? Is there any English speaker who doesn’t instantly understand what the phrase means? There’s plenty of language stuff to complain about without picking on well-established idioms. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/114 "2003-05-16T16:16:18Z")
It wasn’t a well-established idiom until AOL made it. But you’re right. Therefore if AOL’s next slogan is something like “We am the best!” we should also let that slide, because who cares if it’s right or not, as long as it sounds okay. And it will sound okay if it’s drummed into our brains often enough. ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/115 "2003-05-16T16:50:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dantheman \* > \*\*Denotations, actually. Two different tenses. > > But “have” and “got” are definitely pretty much the same thing. If you have it, you got it. If you got it, you have it. It’s dumb to repeat yourself when there’s no reason to do so. > > Also, your examples are in the passive voice, whereas the actual “You’ve got mail” is in the active voice. > > “You have mail” is what it’s telling you. It’s not saying, “Your mail has been delivered.” \*\* 1. Connotation: an idea or meaning suggested by or associated with a word. Also, suggestive or associative significance of an expression, additional to the literal meaning. I stand by my usage. 2. “Got” and “have” overlap in meaning, but they are not the same, which I tried to explain in a previous post. I’m sorry you didn’t get the point. 3. I chose my examples to demonstrate another use of the present perfect tense related to getting and receiving mail. Here’s one on another subject, in the active voice: “I became bored with this topic” vs. “I have become bored with this topic.” Both are correct. They have similar meanings, but different connotations. The fact is that “have got” is not only generally accepted, it is entirely correct. ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/116 "2003-05-16T17:10:17Z")
I doubt it’s “generally” accepted and is “entirely correct.” And in any event, it’s certainly no “fact.” If so, by whom? Third graders? It’s certainly accepted in areas outside of the U.S., but is it considered correct English even there? If it’s an actual fact that it’s accepted and correct, prove it. I’ve never heard any professional writers or speakers use “have got” unless they were using the vernacular voice. Oops, excuse me; none in the past 100 years or so. The truth is, most people don’t use it, because they probably realize it sounds dumb - and, of course, it takes twice as long to say “have got” as it takes to say “have.” ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/117 "2003-05-16T17:13:24Z")
By the way, “got” and “have” are synonyms. This means they’re similar in meaning (denotation). I never said they were identical; you misunderstood. And in case you were unsure, the difference between denotation and connotation is that the latter merely _suggests_ a meaning for a word, whereas the former _explicitly directs_ it. Meaning is not implied with denotation. ---
**Author:** ![godzillatemple](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/49beb7/32.png) [@godzillatemple](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godzillatemple)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/118 "2003-05-16T17:15:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dantheman \* > \*\*The truth is, most people don’t use it, because they probably realize it sounds dumb - and, of course, it takes twice as long to say “have got” as it takes to say “have.” \*\* Maybe people don’t say “I have got” very often, but “I’ve got” is common as dirt. I’ve got a headache. I’ve got a big meeting tomorrow. I’ve got a lot of catching up to do. I’ve got a great idea. Saying “I’ve got” takes just as much time as saying “I have” and sounds much more natural to my ears. Barry ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/119 "2003-05-16T17:21:34Z")
I’ve got takes longer - it’s the “'ve” that does it. Try it. “I have” and “I got” are the same, but the “'ve” makes “I’ve got” the longer of the two. ---
**Author:** ![godzillatemple](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/49beb7/32.png) [@godzillatemple](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godzillatemple)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991/120 "2003-05-16T17:26:30Z")
Nope, sorry. Unless you want to start talking milliseconds here, in which case I would have to say you are simply arguing for the sake of arguing. The point remains that “I’ve got” is an incredibly common idiom that is both accepted and correct, and it doesn’t take “twice as long” to say as “I have”. You are correct that saying “I have got” is both awkward and uncommon, but that’s really just a straw man since “I’ve got” is gramatically equivalent and is neither awkward nor uncommon. Barry [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gross-abuses-of-the-english-language/174991.md?page=7)