PDA

View Full Version : I've just got + obj + to + V



pash
09-24-2006, 02:33 AM
Does this appear in your variant of English?

I've just got my coat to put on and I'll be right with you.

And am I correct in thinking that it expresses necessity and not really possession?

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 02:48 AM
Yes; and the use of "got" in that fashion is markedly American, and even there, it's dialect determinative.

Using "got" this way used to be, a long time ago, a dialect marker for Northern forms of Middle English; got is from Old Norse, and Norse influenced Scots and Northumbrian English much more than it did more southerly forms.

See the Blessed American Heritage Dictionary, and be sure to note the Usage note near the end of the entry.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/84/G0108400.html

pash
09-24-2006, 03:30 AM
You're a G/godsend, Medievalist. Thanks.

Jamesaritchie
09-24-2006, 03:39 AM
Does this appear in your variant of English?

I've just got my coat to put on and I'll be right with you.

And am I correct in thinking that it expresses necessity and not really possession?

Yes, but the syntax sounds more British than American.

pash
09-24-2006, 10:23 AM
Yes, but the syntax sounds more British than American.

I see. Are you a speaker of AE?

pdr
09-24-2006, 03:01 PM
James, that sounds American to me. Surely the British/NZ/Oz version would be:

'I've just got to put on my coat and I'll be right with you.'

pash
09-24-2006, 10:12 PM
There may arise an interesting ambiguity in the reading of the second option.


I've just got my coat to put on and I'll be right with you.(I've put everything else on except for my coat)

I've just got to put on my coat and I'll be right with you. (I'm going to come to you naked except for my coat.)

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 10:38 PM
Pash, there's no way that

I've just got to put on my coat and I'll be right with you.

Can mean

I'm going to come to you naked except for my coat.

The use of "got" in this instance has it functioning as an intensifier; "I've got to put on my coat -- implying that no matter what the circumstances are, I'm going to put on my coat.

Keep in mind that language works in context, so removing the context effectively changes the interpretation.

In a standard colloquial British context, I would expect to see

"I've just to put on my coat and I'll be right with you."

This is colloquial; in more formal British English, I would expect to see
"Just let me put on my coat and I'll be right with you."

This would also be standard American English.

pash
09-24-2006, 11:19 PM
OK, Medievalist, I get it now. Thanks again.

Jamesaritchie
09-25-2006, 02:51 AM
James, that sounds American to me. Surely the British/NZ/Oz version would be:

'I've just got to put on my coat and I'll be right with you.'

This is the way we would say it aorund here. It may just be the regions where I've lived, but I've never heard an American say I've just got my coat to put on.

It's always I've just got to put my coat on, or I just have to put my coat on.

"Got to" is, at least in my experience, far more American than British. I'be got to put on my coat, I've got to go to the storre, etc.

pdr
09-25-2006, 03:50 AM
James. We were always told at school that: "Got to" was a nasty American expression and not good English. :)

brianm
09-25-2006, 08:58 AM
Being N. Irish I would say... "I've just my cost to put on." Got sounds very American to me...

"I've got ten bucks, how much do you have?"

Medievalist
09-25-2006, 09:41 AM
Got entered American English primarily through people who spoke Scots and Northumbrian dialects in the seventeen hundreds.

It was identified as a "pernicious" habit of speech by Noah Webster. It's been treated, in the past, as a class marker.

Jamesaritchie
09-25-2006, 10:53 AM
James. We were always told at school that: "Got to" was a nasty American expression and not good English. :)

It is a nasty American habit. As nasty and as American as anything can be. That's my point. Nasty or not, it's the way all the Americans I know speak. It's even the way I speak in causal conversation.

JennaGlatzer
09-25-2006, 11:44 AM
This is the way we would say it aorund here. It may just be the regions where I've lived, but I've never heard an American say I've just got my coat to put on.

It's always I've just got to put my coat on, or I just have to put my coat on.

"Got to" is, at least in my experience, far more American than British. I'be got to put on my coat, I've got to go to the storre, etc.

Just posting to agree entirely with this. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say it like the OP wrote it.

pash
09-25-2006, 12:40 PM
James. We were always told at school that: "Got to" was a nasty American expression and not good English. :)

Like this, "can't speak now, I got to/gotta/godda go" it's ugly, but as "I've got to go" it's British English and fine.

pash
09-25-2006, 12:49 PM
To me, there is an important difference between:

I've just got my coat to put on then I'll ...

I've just got to my put my on my coat then I'll ...
-----

The first can mean "that's the last item of clothes I have yet to put on" (only referring to dressing) and the second can mean "putting my coat on is the last thing of all things here that I have to do" (the last action of all types of action).

Jamesaritchie
09-25-2006, 11:49 PM
To me, there is an important difference between:

I've just got my coat to put on then I'll ...

I've just got to my put my on my coat then I'll ...
-----

The first can mean "that's the last item of clothes I have yet to put on" (only referring to dressing) and the second can mean "putting my coat on is the last thing of all things here that I have to do" (the last action of all types of action).

Probably right, but you have to include the rest of the sentence to get full understanding.

davidthompson
09-26-2006, 02:06 AM
Just posting to agree entirely with this. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say it like the OP wrote it.

I'd say it either like the OP: "I've just got my coat to put on and I'll be right with you" or the other way, "I've just got to put my coat on...," but I think the OP's version might seem a little more natural.

It would also seem equally natural to say, "I just have my coat to put on..."

Supposedly I speak American English from the southern Ohio, western West Virginia region.

pdr
09-26-2006, 04:36 AM
It's been treated, in the past, as a class marker.

Actually it still is. Despite all the talk of a classless society in Europe and the Commonwealth, people are still judged by their accents and the way they speak.

pash
09-26-2006, 05:51 AM
It's been treated, in the past, as a class marker.



By who/m?

;-)

Medievalist
09-26-2006, 06:03 AM
Any of the standard dialect texts and maps for the UK and the U.S.

Even Johnson's dictionary, in fact, treats got this way.

Jamesaritchie
09-26-2006, 08:21 AM
I'd say it either like the OP: "I've just got my coat to put on and I'll be right with you" or the other way, "I've just got to put my coat on...," but I think the OP's version might seem a little more natural.

It would also seem equally natural to say, "I just have my coat to put on..."

Supposedly I speak American English from the southern Ohio, western West Virginia region.

Do you really hear everyday people speak this way? I live in the same region, and I've never, ever heard it.

pash
09-26-2006, 10:45 AM
This is the way we would say it aorund here. It may just be the regions where I've lived, but I've never heard an American say I've just got my coat to put on.

It's always I've just got to put my coat on, or I just have to put my coat on.

"Got to" is, at least in my experience, far more American than British. I'be got to put on my coat, I've got to go to the storre, etc.

Looking at American websites on Google, I find the "I've just got my * to *" appears many times, but it tends to have the meaning of "achieve or persuade.

EG

I've just got my PC to function again.
I've just got my father to agree to...

I haven't yet found one that means "I've just/only got my * to *".

pash
09-27-2006, 10:28 PM
I wrote these in an unconscious, random fashion. Which ones would you say imply: a) possession in the concrete sense; b) possession in the abstract sense; c) obligation and/or compulsion and/or necessity; d) can/am able to; e) a combination of those factors (please state the combinations); f) neither of the above?




1. I have a right to be heard.
2. I have a job to do.
3. I have a nice coat.
4. I have a nice coat to wear.
5. I have a baby to feed.
6. I have a (my) baby to feed now.
7. I have a million things to say.
8. I have a mission to accomplish.
9. I have a test to do.
10. I have a marathon to win
11. I have a marathon to run.
12. I have a book to read.
13. I have a letter to write.
14. I have letter to mail.
15. I have bill to pay.
16. I have lover to keep happy.
17. I have a car to sell.
18. I have a mountain to climb.
19. I have money to burn.
20. I have you to thank.

Tsu Dho Nimh
09-27-2006, 11:59 PM
I wrote these in an unconscious, random fashion. Which ones would you say imply: a) possession in the concrete sense; b) possession in the abstract sense; c) obligation and/or compulsion and/or necessity; d) can/am able to; e) a combination of those factors (please state the combinations); f) neither of the above?

1. I have a right to be heard. B
2. I have a job to do. C
3. I have a nice coat. A
4. I have a nice coat to wear. A D
5. I have a baby to feed. C
6. I have a (my) baby to feed now. AC
7. I have a million things to say. C
8. I have a mission to accomplish. C
9. I have a test to do. C


It's usually an obligaiton or task or intangible possession like rights, words, and ideas.

Third most often it's a concrete possession (Usually answer to the question "who has a chainsaw")

davidthompson
09-28-2006, 12:03 AM
Do you really hear everyday people speak this way? I live in the same region, and I've never, ever heard it.

No, I just made that up. Actually, I speak French, and I'm writing through an automatic translator. :)

Uh, I don't know what to say. I think I'm an everyday person, and I speak that way. I've not spent a lot of time noticing who else I've definitely heard say it, but I know that it would be very natural for me to say, and I was raised by parents and a grandmother who grew up in the same area.

As a test, I just said the following sentence to my wife: "I've just got another page to get done, and I'll be through proofreading this chapter." Then I asked her, "Did that sound like I was saying something in an odd or unnatural way?" She just looked at me with a puzzled stare and shook her head. I explained, and she said it sounded perfectly normal.

What's really funny is that over in the historical writing forum, we're discussing whether it's even possible to duplicate the way people talked in an era before we lived, and how to make it sound believable if true duplication isn't the goal. Apparently, it's hard enough to agree on the way people talk in a time and place where we do live!

pash
09-28-2006, 05:39 PM
1. I have a right to be heard. B
2. I have a job to do. C
3. I have a nice coat. A
4. I have a nice coat to wear. A D
5. I have a baby to feed. C
6. I have a (my) baby to feed now. AC
7. I have a million things to say. C
8. I have a mission to accomplish. C
9. I have a test to do. C


It's usually an obligaiton or task or intangible possession like rights, words, and ideas.

Third most often it's a concrete possession (Usually answer to the question "who has a chainsaw")

That's wonderful. Thanks for talking the time.

Medievalist
09-28-2006, 07:11 PM
David, might you be over-educated, by any chance?

davidthompson
09-30-2006, 07:03 PM
David, might you be over-educated, by any chance?

Hate to bump the thread without adding anything constructive, but I just noticed that reply, and it cracked me up. Especially coming from someone who can post on high falutin topics like Medievalist.

The most I've got is two years of business classes at a community college. If that's overeducated, I'd hate to see undereducated. :)