# I've got/ gotten ...



## wistful

I think we should use the past participate form of the verb after "have".


----------



## Outsider

And you do! "To get" has two past participles, "got" and "gotten".


----------



## panjandrum

Hello wistful, and welcome to WordReference.

In BE - British English - we do not (normally) say gotten in this context.


----------



## carlox

panjandrum said:


> Hello wistful, and welcome to WordReference.
> 
> In BE - British English - we do not (normally) say gotten in this context.



Hi everyone!

Indeed, I think the word _gotten_ does not exist in British English, and _got _is the only participle. Am I right? Surely not, I've only been for one week to England... .

CARLOS.


----------



## Whodunit

Carlox, you *are* right. "Gotten" is American English only, while "got" is used in Britain. However, you may also find "got" in American English in some contexts, as in "Gotcha" (= I got you).


----------



## Dimcl

> However, you may also find "got" in American English in some contexts, as in "Gotcha"


 
You will find "got" in American English in many contexts.  Although "gotten" is perfectly acceptable in AE, it is still somewhat looked upon as "slang" by some people.  One would be just as likely to hear "I've got by on 3 hours' sleep a night for many years" as "I've gotten by on 3 hours' sleep a night for many years".


----------



## elroy

Dimcl said:


> One would be just as likely to hear "I've got by on 3 hours' sleep a night for many years" as "I've gotten by on 3 hours' sleep a night for many years".


 I disagree with this point and think that the second version is much more likely in American English.

As for the original question, both "got" and "gotten" are possible in that sentence but they have different meanings.

"I've got something" = I have something.
"I've gotten something" = I have received something.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:


> "I've got something" = I have something.
> "I've gotten something" = I have received something.


 
I'm not sure if you can generalize it that easily. Speaking about American English, "I('ve) got something" means "I have something," yes, but this is not the only meaning in British English. It also means "I have received something."

On the other hand, I would most likely say "Have you got my letter yet?" rather than "Have you gotten my letter yet?" Maybe this is because I'm taught British English at school, but the latter sounds a bit strange. Although Google is not a reliable source to check such things, the "got" sentence wins in the context.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q="have+you+gotten+my+letter
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="have+you+got+my+letter&btnG=Search&lr=


----------



## elroy

I was referring exclusively to American English.  I apologize for not having made that clearer.


----------



## panjandrum

I mustn't let this thread pass without mentioning what is probably the only natural remaining use of gotten in BE - *ill-gotten*, which means acquired by evil or at least illegal means.  Indeed it is almost always *ill-gotten gains*.


----------



## jdenson

Whodunit said:


> Carlox, you *are* right. "Gotten" is American English only, while "got" is used in Britain. However, you may also find "got" in American English in some contexts, as in "Gotcha" (= I got you).


It would be more correct to say that "gotten" is not _current_ British English, except in words like forgotten, ill-gotten, and misbegotten. 
This from _The American Heritage® Book of English Usage_:  "The notion that _gotten_ is illegitimate has been around for over 200 years and refuses to die. The word itself is much older than the criticism against it. As past participles of _get,_ both _got_ and _gotten_ go back to the Middle Ages."
"Jack Cade hath gotten London bridge:"
--_Henry VI, Part 2_, Act IV, Scene IV (William Shakespeare)
JD


----------



## IckyBug

If "got/gotten" is acceptable, why not "bought/boughten"? "brought/broughten"? "sought/soughten?"


----------



## panjandrum

IckyBug said:


> If "got/gotten" is acceptable, why not "bought/boughten"? "brought/broughten"? "sought/soughten?"


Because the -en suffix applied only to certain classes of word.
There are others still in use: _broken, spoken, sunken._


----------



## IckyBug

Oh, really? 

Why, then, can't these other words be considered in the same class?

I am especially curious about "bought"/"boughten" because the meaning of bought might be considered a sub-class of "got", since purchasing something is merely one of many possible means of gaining possession of it.  

I admit that I only included the other words because they immediately came to mind as having identical ending-spellings.  I think "soughten" and "broughten" sound ridiculous, but maybe I am just not used to them.  I certainly don't know any real reason (besides an arbitrarily-assigned class, that is) they shouldn't be allowable.


----------



## mplsray

IckyBug said:


> If "got/gotten" is acceptable, why not "bought/boughten"? "brought/broughten"? "sought/soughten?"


 
"Broughten," "broughten," and "soughten" are not part of the English language (and even if it happens that they are, they are not part of any standard dialect, to my knowledge).

Your question is logically equivalent to "If 'oxen' and 'children' are acceptable, why not 'chairen' and 'housen'?" In short, it's a non sequitur.


----------



## IckyBug

What I am saying that words that end with the same letters should generally follow the same rules.

Obviously, neither "chair" or "house" end with the same letters as "ox" or "child".


----------



## panjandrum

_Moderator note:
Speculation about what might have been, or what in your opinion ought to be, is not within the scope of this forum.
Further discussion of boughten has been re-located to boughten.
panjandrum
(Moderator)
_


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Whodunit said:


> Carlox, you *are* right. "Gotten" is American English only, while "got" is used in Britain.



Gotten is also standard usage in (the Republic of) Ireland. See this, this, or this article, all from the Irish Times, where the gotten form is employed. Some older people complain about it mistakenly believing it to be an Americanism, in fact it's a relic of the English that was introduced to Ireland in the 16th century and never fell out of usage, similar to what happened in the U.S.

As to the original question, the two sentences convey different meanings.

I've got something = I have something in my possession.
I've gotten something = I received something.


----------



## JamesM

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Gotten is also standard usage in (the Republic of) Ireland. See this, this, or this article, all from the Irish Times, where the gotten form is employed. Some older people complain about it mistakenly believing it to be an Americanism, in fact it's a relic of the English that was introduced to Ireland in the 16th century and never fell out of usage, similar to what happened in the U.S.
> 
> As to the original question, the two sentences convey different meanings.
> 
> I've got something = I have something in my possession.
> I've gotten something = I received something.


 
Yes, this is the beauty of having the two, in my opinion.  It allows someone to be more precise than having only "got" to express both conditions.


----------



## panjandrum

Interesting, PdeT.
There have been other similar examples - where something that has fallen into disuse in BE remains current in AE and in IE.  And as you say, people grumble that we have been contaminated by the Americans 

I didn't realise that "gotten" was still around down there.

The examples are curious.  Apart from the first headline (an allusion to Laurel and Hardy), they don't seem to me to reflect the "I received", or "I have acquired" sense.

_Rugby has gotten a little complex on us._
What a peculiar sentence, I think.

_Yesterday was certainly as close as anyone has gotten in getting it done so far._
Oh yuk.  I don't like gotten and getting together.  But never mind my distaste - it doesn't look like a "received" or "acquired" gotten either.

I wonder would our AE natives be comfortable with these examples?


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

panjandrum said:


> In BE - British English - we do not (normally) say gotten in this context.


... at least, not anymore. 

Panj, I would distinguish between "has got" and "has gotten".  To me, "has gotten" can mean either _has become_, or _has acquired_:
_Rugby has gotten complicated with the introduction of the exploding ball._
_John has gotten himself a new job._

"Has got", on the other hand, would mean "has possessed" or "has retained":
_Your claim that Jane has no nice clothes is false; I know for a fact that she has got twenty designer dresses in her bedroom closet._


----------



## TropicalMontana

_Linda has gotten a little complex.

_is not the same meaning as

_Linda has got a little complex._ 


The nuance in difference is 'gotten' has a sense of just arriving, or becoming, while 'got' is about having.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Has gotten can take on various meanings, depending on context. For me, the sentence "_Rugby has gotten a little complex on us_" sounds perfectly natural here as the _has gotten_ means "has become", as GreenWhiteBlue alluded to.

Indeed, _gotten _can even refer to movement (literally and figuratively). Another example, as ever from the Irish Times; 

"....while fourth-seed Novak Djokovic meets Israeli player Dudi Sela, who _has never gotten past _the third round of a Grand Slam before and never beyond Wimbledon’s first round."


----------



## elroy

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> "Has got", on the other hand, would mean "has possessed" or "has retained":
> _Your claim that Jane has no nice clothes is false; I know for a fact that she has got twenty designer dresses in her bedroom closet._


 I agree with your example, but I wouldn't translate "has got" as "has possessed" or "has retained" but simply as "has" or even "possesses."  Neither "has possessed" nor "has retained" would be natural substitutes for "has got" in your sentence.

And yes, Pedro is right about the different meanings of "gotten," since it is simply a past participle of "get," which has a plethora of meanings.  Regardless of the meaning, the past participle is always "gotten" in American (and apparently Irish) English.  "Has got," on the other hand, is a special construction with a specific idiomatic meaning; it is not the present perfect form of the verb "to get."

I think it's absolutely fascinating that "gotten" has survived in Ireland, so not just in America.


----------



## panjandrum

Some of us live in a got-less world (see many threads about have got.
It is also a gotten-less world.
I don't feel deprived because of this.  We have other ways of expressing the same meaning 

There are rather a lot of expressions/usages that the English English have now lost but remain in IE as well as in AE.


----------



## Jocaste

I spent some time in Ireland recently and I too heard the gotten form employed by almost everyone I met. I was surprised because I always thought it was an American-only thing too. I like it though, it's a more precise way of expressing a thought.


----------



## sound shift

Jocaste said:


> I spent some time in Ireland recently and I too heard the gotten form employed by almost everyone I met. I was surprised because I always thought it was an American-only thing too. I like it though, it's a more precise way of expressing a thought.


It's just a different _form._ It's no more or less precise.


----------



## Jocaste

sound shift said:


> It's just a different _form._ It's no more or less precise.



I was mainly referring to the examples below.



> Pedro y La Torre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gotten is also standard usage in (the Republic of) Ireland. See this, this, or this article, all from the Irish Times, where the gotten form is employed. Some older people complain about it mistakenly believing it to be an Americanism, in fact it's a relic of the English that was introduced to Ireland in the 16th century and never fell out of usage, similar to what happened in the U.S.
> 
> As to the original question, the two sentences convey different meanings.
> 
> I've got something = I have something in my possession.
> I've gotten something = I received something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JamesM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, this is the beauty of having the two, in my opinion. It allows someone to be more precise than having only "got" to express both conditions.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## natkretep

Interesting about the Irish examples.

I just wanted to say that _gotten_ was perfectly respectable a few hundred years earlier in BE, eg in the 1611 Bible: 'Then  Jacob rose up, and set his sons and his wives upon camels; And he carried away all his cattle and all his goods which he had *gotten*'. And of course *forgotten* is standard BE past participle today. Robbie Burns has 'Should auld acquaintance be *forgot*', indicating that the alternation of forms is not something new.


----------



## sound shift

JamesM said:


> Yes, this is the beauty of having the two, in my opinion.  It allows someone to be more precise than having only "got" to express both conditions.


There is no imprecision here because in BE we don't use "I've got" to mean "I received".


----------



## LV4-26

sound shift said:


> There is no imprecision here because in BE we don't use "I've got" to mean "I received".


Perhaps not, but you do say things like...
_I've got myself a new PC_
...to mean "I have acquired.....".
Don't you?

Though I admit the ambiguity is avoided here again (thanks to the _myself_), it remains that, even in BE, _I've got_ doesn't always mean _I have in my posession._.

I know the simple past (_I got myself)_ is generally more likely in similar contexts, but then that's the whole problem. Why is this kind of sentence more often used in the past simple? Why wouldn't _get_ (in the sense of _acquire_) be entitled to a present perfect form as all the other verbs? Precisely because of the potential ambiguity with "_I've got=I have._"


----------



## sound shift

LV4-26 said:


> Perhaps not, but you do say things like...
> _I've recently got myself a new PC_
> ...to mean "I acquired.....".
> Don't you?


Yes, we do, but as you say it means "I have acquired", not "I have received".

We BE speakers don't perceive any imprecision or confusion when we use "got" among ourselves. If the  usage in question had been causing confusion, it would have been abandoned in favour of something else.


----------



## JamesM

Every variant of every language has features that could be potentially ambiguous to speakers of other variants and other languages.  I hope you were not personally offended by my comments about the beauty of having both "got" and "gotten".   I'm sure "got" works perfectly well in BE.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

I personally view gotten as more precise as it's what is standard for me. Obviously an English person might view it differently. Such is the beauty of languages.


----------



## LV4-26

sound shift said:


> We BE speakers don't perceive any imprecision or confusion when we use "got" among ourselves. If the  usage in question had been causing confusion, it would have been abandoned in favour of something else.


Fair enough. What I'm saying is that it generally works fine this way but there *are* some borderline cases that require some ad hoc adjustments.

Consider
_1. I've got a new PC
2. I've recently got a new PC_

If I mean #2, I can't do without the addition of the "_recently_" (or some similar adverb). Otherwise, there's no doubt I'll be misunderstood.

Nothing particularly annoying, but still...

Don't get me wrong. I've been taught BE, have stayed in England a number of times, am a regular user of "_I've got_" and _gotten_ isn't in my vocabulary. But having gotten this far, I've got no reason to give in.


----------



## Rushé

I'd just like to say that "Gotten" is moderately commonplace in British English, and certainly wouldn't be looked down upon - although it could quite be an Americanism, however, it does come across quite archaic; the kind of stuff you'd find in a 1960's School Grammar Textbook. For example:

I had gotten my books from somewhere else.

I think it's because BE favours the imperfect for a definitive action - in this case "got" - while the perfect (have gotten) seems to have a bit more doubt around it. Got is definitely preferred though!


----------



## natkretep

LV4-26 said:


> Fair enough. What I'm saying is that it generally works fine this way but there *are* some borderline cases that require some ad hoc adjustments.
> 
> Consider
> _1. I've got a new PC
> 2. I've recently got a new PC_
> 
> If I mean #2, I can't do without the addition of the "_recently_" (or some similar adverb). Otherwise, there's no doubt I'll be misunderstood.



I don't think (2) would be normal in BE because the perfective isn't normally used with a time adverbial. I'm not a _gotten_ user, and I wouldn't use (1) to express the meaning that I had just acquired a new PC. Because _have got_ means _possess_, I would need something else for the acquisition meaning, perhaps

(3) I've got *myself *a new PC
(4) I've *just* got a new PC

or use another verb:

(5) I've *bought* a new PC.


----------



## LV4-26

natkretep said:


> I don't think (2) would be normal in BE because the perfective isn't normally used with a time adverbial. I'm not a _gotten_ user, and I wouldn't use (1) to express the meaning that I had just acquired a new PC. Because _have got_ means _possess_, I would need something else for the acquisition meaning, perhaps
> 
> (3) I've got *myself *a new PC
> (4) I've *just* got a new PC
> 
> or use another verb:
> 
> (5) I've *bought* a new PC.


Sorry, I need a little clarification here.
I mean, your post exactly reflects what I've been saying from the start (though maybe in a more articulate way) but you don't make it clear whether you differ or agree with the paragraph you quoted.


----------



## natkretep

I'm agreeing in so far as it is almost impossible in my dialect to say _I've got a new PC_ to mean _I have obtained a new PC_ because the possession meaning is too strong. Those who have _gotten_ can presumably say _I've gotten a new PC_ for the acquisition meaning.


----------



## LV4-26

natkretep said:


> [...]Those who have _gotten_ can presumably say _I've gotten a new PC_ for the acquisition meaning.


Yes, they can


----------



## mupbtn

In relation to:
have got/gotten - present perfect

I need a little clarification. 
Let's say I'm an actor and I'm saying: 

A proper story for my character hasn't been written yet. 

Can I say (very infromal) that: My character hasn't got a proper story yet. (but the writer's still working on it)


----------



## natkretep

mupbtn said:


> Can I say (very informal) that: My character hasn't got a proper story yet. (but the writer's still working on it)



You certainly can, particularly if the speaker is meant to speak BE-style English.


----------



## JamesM

In AE, I think it would be more typical to hear "My character doesn't have a real story yet."  I suppose it depends on whether your audience speaks American English or British English.


----------



## sunyaer

natkretep said:


> LV4-26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough. What I'm saying is that it generally works fine this way but there *are* some borderline cases that require some ad hoc adjustments.
> 
> Consider
> _1. I've got a new PC
> 2. I've recently got a new PC_
> 
> If I mean #2, I can't do without the addition of the "_recently_" (or some similar adverb). Otherwise, there's no doubt I'll be misunderstood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think (2) would be normal in BE because the perfective isn't normally used with a time _adverbial._ I'm not a _gotten_ user, and I wouldn't use (1) to express the meaning that I had just acquired a new PC. Because _have got_ means _possess_, I would need something else for the acquisition meaning, perhaps
> 
> (3) I've got *myself *a new PC
> (4) I've *just* got a new PC
> 
> or use another verb:
> 
> (5) I've *bought* a new PC.
Click to expand...


Is the word "just" in (4) a time adverbial as the word "recently" in #2?


----------



## JamesM

In British English or American English?  Example (4) above means to me:  "I only have a new PC" (as opposed to also having a new car, for example) or, depending on context, "All I have is a new PC".  So, for me, "just" means "only" in that sentence, not "recently".   It doesn't mean "I recently acquired a new PC" in my form of English.


----------

