# have got - in British too?



## Chilean_Girl

Hi! I'm from Chile, my native language is spanish but I speak english. My question is... do young british people use "to have GOT" by now or just "To have", like american people? Is "to have got" an old fashioned way to use the verb?

And... do young british people pronounce the "d" in "everybody" or they pronounce it similar to american people? Can I use the traditional british pronunciation nowadays talking with young people? I've heard some singers, like Morrisey, who pronounce in a traditional way, but I don't if that's a modern way to pronounce. 

I'd love that native english speakers could answer me. Thanks for your help!


----------



## chickenhelene

Hi, I hadn't really thought about it but actually we do use the 'have got' construction more - but young people wouldn't say 'i have got' normally, but abbreviate it to 'i've got', as with most things. And we do pronounce the 'd' in everybody - I didn't know you couldn't!

Hope that helps, 
Helen


----------



## Chilean_Girl

Thanks for your answer! 
Well, when I refered to the "d" in everybody, I wanted to say that american people pronounce that like a spanish r instead of a d. I just wanted to know if young british people pronounce that similar to american people or it's very different. Thanks!


----------



## swift_precision

Oye chilean... nosotros estadounidenses pronunciamos la "d" también en "everybody".   Sería incomprensible si no se pronuncia.


----------



## swift_precision

Chilean_Girl said:
			
		

> Thanks for your answer!
> Well, when I refered to the "d" in everybody, I wanted to say that american people pronounce that like a spanish r instead of a d. I just wanted to know if young british people pronounce that similar to american people or it's very different. Thanks!


 
eh? de donde sacaste esto? jeje pronunciando la "d" como si fuera la "r" espanola? jajaj si yo pronuncio así la gente me mira raro


----------



## shika

swift_precision said:
			
		

> Oye chilean... nosotros estadounidenses pronunciamos la "d" también en "everybody". Sería incomprensible si no se pronuncia.


 
Yo creo que lo que ella quiere decir es que la d en *everybody* no es como la d de *damp*, o *dog*... mas bien como la tt de _*pretty.*_

*Shika *


----------



## Chilean_Girl

Hola, que bueno que un norteamericano hable español, lo que pasa es que para nosotros los latinos la diferencia entre el inglés británico y el norteamericano es muy marcada. Para nosotros los hispano hablantes, cuando oímos la palabra "everybody", a veces nos da la impresión de oír algo que nosotros, desde nuestro español, podríamos escribir como "evribari" (así es como un latino lo escucha). I just wanted to know if there is a strong difference to pronounce that word depending on the country.


----------



## Chilean_Girl

De dónde eres Shika? Lo que pasa es que yo estudio Linguística y Literatura Inglesa y podría explicar mejor a que me refiero si usara términos como d fricativa, dental, etc. Pero creo que esos son tecnicismos que otras personas no manejan, así que es algo complicado explicar por escrito a qué me refiero, sería mucho más fácil si pudiera ejemplicarlo por medio de audio. Claro que acá no se puede, por supuesto. Gracias de todas formas.


----------



## Chilean_Girl

I think that to explain better my question could be easy if I could use audio but that is impossible here. I could explain better my idea if I could use technical terms like "fricative d", "unrealised d", "dental d" or whatever. I study english linguistics and literature so I know that terms, but maybe they are too much technical and they are unknown by people who don't study linguistics, so it's hard to explain the question, and, it's obvious that native speakers of any language don't think about their own language (like I don't think about technical aspects of the spanish - I just think about technical aspects of the english because I study that).
Anyway, thanks!


----------



## shika

soy de rep. dominicana


----------



## mdbtaa

I'm pretty sure that what she means about not pronouncing the "d" in everybody by young British people has more to do with their accent than anything else.  In the "cockney" british accent, even I had trouble understanding many people in Britain.  They would probably pronounce "everybody" more like:

EV-REE-BA-EE

This can be confusing for other English speakers, to say nothing of Spanish speakers.  I correspond with a woman in Colombia whose style of Spanish is very different from the "International Spanish" that I learned, and much less formal . . using words that quite frequently aren't even in dictionaries.  Like tigrillo . . . although it's probably safe to assume she meant tiger or small tiger, or amiguisimo . . although it's probably safe to assume she means something like "dearest friend of mine".


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

Chilean_Girl said:


> sería mucho más fácil si pudiera ejemplicarlo por medio de audio. Claro que acá no se puede, por supuesto.





Chilean_Girl said:


> I think that to explain better my question could be easy if I could use audio but that is impossible here.


Sí puedes:


Crea un _post_ haciendo clic en _post_.
Desplázate hacia abajo de la pantalla hasta Additional Options.
Haz clic en Manage Attachments.
Súbenos un audio que hayas grabado para que podamos escucharlo.
Un saludo.

Pedro.


----------



## mgwls

This webpage www[dot]uiowa[dot]edu/~acadtech/phonetics/# might be of some help. Unfortunately the website doesn't contain the UK variant of english pronounciation but perhaps AE english and spanish are enough to explain yourself.


----------



## Alan Oldstudent

Chilean_Girl said:


> I think that to explain better my question could be easy if I could use audio but that is impossible here. I could explain better my idea if I could use technical terms like "fricative d", "unrealised d", "dental d" or whatever. I study english linguistics and literature so I know that terms, but maybe they are too much technical and they are unknown by people who don't study linguistics, so it's hard to explain the question, and, it's obvious that native speakers of any language don't think about their own language (like I don't think about technical aspects of the spanish - I just think about technical aspects of the english because I study that).
> Anyway, thanks!


Mi lengua primera es "Standard American English" y de costumbre digo el "d" bastante claro. Pero dejo la secunda "e." Lo digo de esta manera: "EVribadi", con el accento mas fuerte en "EV". Los vocales son un poco distincto que se los encuentre en Español, especialmente "a" en "ba". No soy estudiante de lingüística, pero así lo digo.

Alan


----------



## virgilio

Chilean Girl,
                 En el lenguaje quotidiano decimos "have got" en vez de "have" y normalmente "'ve got" en vez de "have got"
p. e.

We've got a new car.

Suena algo más 'educado' decir "We have a new car".

Osservo yo que algunos estadounidenses prescinden completamente del verbo "have" y trasmutan el participio pasado "got" en verbo, diciendo por ejemplo:

"We got a new car" (en el significado de "we have a new car")
"What do you got?" ( "   "    "             " "What have you got?")

Pero esta trasmutación es de EEUU.  No lo usamos los ingleses.

Spero que esto ayude.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## lazarus1907

Chilean_Girl said:


> Well, when I refered to the "d" in everybody, I wanted to say that american people pronounce that like a spanish r instead of a d. I just wanted to know if young british people pronounce that similar to american people or it's very different. Thanks!


Tú lo has estudiado: su d es alveolar, como nuestra erre.


swift_precision said:


> eh? de donde sacaste esto? jeje pronunciando la "d" como si fuera la "r" espanola? jajaj si yo pronuncio así la gente me mira raro


It's not a joke! The way the “*d*” is pronounced in USA almost identical to the way we Spanish speakers pronounce our “*r*” (the soft one); we pronounce our “*d*” in a different way. Just ask anyone from America who doesn't speak any Spanish to pronounce "todo". To our ears, they'll be pronouncing "toro".


----------



## lazarus1907

Alan Oldstudent said:


> Mi lengua primera es "Standard American English" y de costumbre digo el "d" bastante claro. Pero dejo la secunda "e." Lo digo de esta manera: "EVribadi", con el accento mas fuerte en "EV". Los vocales son un poco distincto que se los encuentre en Español, especialmente "a" en "ba". No soy estudiante de lingüística, pero así lo digo.


No sé cómo de bien pronuncias la "d" en español, pero la "d" estándar americana no se parece en nada a la española, así que si tratas de pronunciarla en español igual que en inglés, sonará mal; al igual que la "d" del español no termina de sonar bien en inglés.

Pero tienes razón: lo peor son las vocales, porque el inglés tiende a alargar,diptongar y relajar las vocales, mientras que en español no hacemos ninguna de las tres cosas.


----------



## Alan Oldstudent

lazarus1907 said:


> No sé cómo de bien pronuncias la "d" en español, pero la "d" estándar americana no se parece en nada a la española, así que si tratas de pronunciarla en español igual que en inglés, sonará mal; al igual que la "d" del español no termina de sonar bien en inglés.


Tienes mucho razón cuando dices que no hay nada en español como el "d" en inglés. Es lo mismo en el caso de letra "b" y "v," cuáles son muy distintos en inglés. 

Grácias a mph por el vínculo (mensaja 18). Eso es como se dice "everybody" en "Standard American English". 

A propósito, ¿estas un estudiante de la lingüíngistica, no?

Saludos,

Alan


----------



## xxrodxx

I'm chilean too.. and I had the same question about "everybody". What Chilean girls said it's so real... for us sounds like "everyboRy" in american english. Same thing with "somebody"... "xxxxxxbody"

And thaks to Virgilio I had that confussion for many years about "got".. I was like.. why people use got instead get?? and as far as I understood from your explanation is due people uses got as a present verb, wich comes from "have got".. (tell me if i'm wrong)


----------



## mhp

Perhaps the reason it sounds like eveyboRy is not because of 'd' but rather because of 'o'. The 'o' in 'body' has the same sound as 'a' in father. This sound does not exist in Spanish and most Spanish speakers have a very hard time reproducing it.


----------



## virgilio

xxrodxx,
           You are right. The past participle of "get" ("got") has become for some estadounidenses a verb and it is used with the meaning of "have" or "have got".
I hear it frequently in EEUU films. I would guess, however, that it is not used so much by educated Americans. It sounds - to me at least - very colloquial.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## Ms Missy

As a personal experience, I find that in most other languages (with the exception of English), grammatical inconsistences are passed off as 'regional differences.'  But in English we have what is considered as 'standard English' regardless of regional differences.  With that in mind, I must say that many English speakers do use the word 'got' when it should have been 'have.'

Ex:  I've got no time to lose... instead of ...I have no time to lose.

But rather than that being a distinct measure between the educated and the uneducated, I think a truer measure would be the ability to distinguish between casual conversation among friends and family, as opposed to something that had to be submitted as formal writing.


----------



## NewdestinyX

xxrodxx said:


> I'm chilean too.. and I had the same question about "everybody". What Chilean girls said it's so real... for us sounds like "everyboRy" in american english. Same thing with "somebody"... "xxxxxxbody"
> 
> And thaks to Virgilio I had that confussion for many years about "got".. I was like.. why people use got instead get?? and as far as I understood from your explanation is due people uses got as a present verb, wich comes from "have got".. (tell me if i'm wrong)



Yes that's exactly it.

Unfortunately -- American English uses this very confusing of 'to have got' = 'to have'. 

The good news is - that when we Americans want to really use the present perfect we say -- to have gotten. So there's no confusion in American English.

I think 'to have got' = 'to have' is in all sectors of American society -- even the educated. 
The same is true for -to have got to = have to

I have to go = I've got to go

Grant


----------



## Marodrey

Chilean,

to be someone that studies linguistics, you have big flaws. 
To hear pronunciation differences in enlgish of various nations, all you need to do is get movies from any country of interest (USA, UK, Ireland, etc) and listen, LISTEN to the young people.

No one who speaks well, will ever say "to have got". "I have got to do something" is an expression of need, so it will be used by any, in any english speaking country, when needed. Like some did explain, it's mos likely to be used in the contracted way: I've got... to have it, to see it, to get there.

By the way, my native language is spanish, but I have spoken (another verb with the auxiliary have), english since birth.

The easy way, is to go and rent a movie.


----------



## virgilio

Marodrey,
             You write:" No one who speaks well, will ever say "to have got"."

If what you say is true, I must have been speaking badly all my life. Oh dear! What a pity! When will I ever learn to speak properly?

You continue:"To hear pronunciation differences in enlgish of various nations, all you need to do is get movies from any country of interest (USA, UK, Ireland, etc) and listen, LISTEN to the young people."

For listening purposes radio is much better than films or TV for you don't then have  the pictures distracting your attention from what you are hearing. Tune in to the national radio of your chosen country and start off with news bulletins and weather forecasts, until you gain confidence. By the way, you might just learn a thing or two, if you listen also to a few of the older folks too!

Virgilio


----------



## nightlone

Marodrey said:


> Chilean,
> 
> to be someone that studies linguistics, you have big flaws.
> To hear pronunciation differences in enlgish of various nations, all you need to do is get movies from any country of interest (USA, UK, Ireland, etc) and listen, LISTEN to the young people.
> 
> No one who speaks well, will ever say "to have got". "I have got to do something" is an expression of need, so it will be used by any, in any english speaking country, when needed. Like some did explain, it's mos likely to be used in the contracted way: I've got... to have it, to see it, to get there.


Marodrey, si realmente crees eso me parece que quizás deberías ver más peliculas del Reino Unido, Irlanda y otros países angloparlantes (o aún mejor: haz lo que ha sugerido virgilio) porque lo que has dicho sobre "to have got" no tiene nada que ver con el inglés que se habla fuera de Norteamérica.

Por cierto, en inglés los nombres de los idiomas siempre se escriben con mayúscula inicial: *e*nglish  *E*nglish .


----------



## Marodrey

Thank you both for your explanations.

To have got.

"I to have got to get there soon?" Is that the proper way? this is what I meant. "You to have got to finish quickly" The "to" particle makes the verb in its infinitive form, right?

As I explained before, I am a spanish native speaker. What I didn't say is that I have NEVER had formal studies of english, I merely speak it. This is why I accept any correction and thank it. I didn't know, (or perhaps remember) that English must be written in Capital letters. Thank you.

Of course radio must be better. I am pretty sure that the differences in speach between young and old, is not the pronunciation but mostly the language.


----------



## Alan Oldstudent

xxrodxx said:


> I'm chilean too.. and I had the same question about "everybody". What Chilean girls said it's so real... for us sounds like "everyboRy" in american english. Same thing with "somebody"... "xxxxxxbody"
> 
> And thaks to Virgilio I had that confussion for many years about "got".. I was like.. why people use got instead get?? and as far as I understood from your explanation is due people uses got as a present verb, wich comes from "have got".. (tell me if i'm wrong)


I understand why you would say that about the American English "d" and the Spanish "r". Our "d" is much stronger, it seems to me. My Spanish-speaking friends say I have a very good Spanish accent. Perhaps they are just being polite, but to me it feels different to say the Spanish "r" and the American English "d."

I am not an expert in linguistics, but to my ear, the American English "d" feels much stronger. The Spanish "r" is made by tapping the tongue once very quickly and somewhat softly, and perhaps the American English "d" is made in about the same place and manner, but it is stronger and more pronounced. 

Perhaps someone who is an expert in linguistics (maybe Lazarus?) will give an opinion on the difference between an American English "d" and the Spanish "r".

Saludos,

Alan


----------



## nightlone

Hi Marodrey,


Marodrey said:


> To have got.
> 
> "I to have got to get there soon?" Is that the proper way? this is what I meant. "You to have got to finish quickly" The "to" particle makes the verb in its infinitive form, right?


Both those sentences are incorrect, but if you take out the first "to" then they are perfectly fine:
"I to have got to get there soon?" , "You to have got to finish quickly". 
If you need a grammatical explanation, wait for someone else...



Marodrey said:


> As I explained before, I am a native *S*panish native speaker. What I didn't say is that I have NEVER had formal studies of *E*nglish, I merely speak it. This is why I accept any correction and thank *you for* it. I didn't know, (or perhaps remember) that English must be written in *c*apital letters. Thank you.


No problem, it's a very common error. English speakers make the same mistake the other way around in Spanish. By the way, like you with English, I've never had any formal studies in Spainish, either.


Marodrey said:


> Of course radio must be better. I am pretty sure that the differences in spe*e*ch between young and old, is not the pronunciation but mostly the language.


I agree, although I am still youngish (not 30 yet) and have no problem communicating with older folk.


----------



## xxrodxx

Alan Oldstudent said:


> I am not an expert in linguistics, but to my ear, the American English "d" feels much stronger. The Spanish "r" is made by tapping the tongue once very quickly and somewhat softly, and perhaps the American English "d" is made in about the same place and manner, but it is stronger and more pronounced.



In some way you're right. But in this particular word (everybody) your  "d" sounds like "r" for us. On the other hand english words with final "d" (and most of English words)  sounds alike Spanish "d" and I agree you make that sound tapping the tong quickly. i.e.: Compound, candy,  end,   surrounded.


----------



## Marodrey

Thank you Nightlone,

It is insisted upon us, spanish speakers, not to write week days, months or anything besides names in capitals, and this is where we get confused. 

It seemed to me that the original question was of this sort of confusion, whether to put "to" and it seemed odd for someone who studies a language to forget that it turns almost any word into a verb when used. 

Thank you again, not only for the explanations but for the great attitude.


----------



## mhp

xxrodxx said:


> In some way you're right. But in this particular word (everybody) your  "d" sounds like "r" for us. On the other hand english words with final "d" (and most of English words)  sounds alike Spanish "d" and I agree you make that sound tapping the tong quickly. i.e.: Compound, candy,  end,   surrounded.



Note that 'd' in everybody and 'd' in body are pronounced exactly the same way. Does body sound like 'boRy' to you? (click on body to hear it)

How about daddy. Does it sound like darRy or RaRy?

The sound of '*dy*' in bo*dy* \ˈbä-dē\ and da*ddy* \ˈda-dē\ are the same.


----------



## xxrodxx

mhp said:


> Note that 'd' in everybody and 'd' in body are pronounced exactly the same way. Does body sound like 'boRy' to you? (click on body to hear it)
> 
> How about daddy. Does it sound like darRy or RaRy?
> 
> The sound of '*dy*' in bo*dy* \ˈbä-dē\ and da*ddy* \ˈda-dē\ are the same.




Hmm.. sometimes souds like boRy and sometimes like boDy.. I listened the record and in (on?) that case sounds more like boRy... well.. it doesn't sounds accurate for me jaja that's for sure. Somebody could say it sounds boDy 

Daddy is more like daDDy, there's no problem with that one.


----------



## tenseconds

mhp said:


> Note that 'd' in everybody and 'd' in body are pronounced exactly the same way. Does body sound like 'boRy' to you? (click on body to hear it)
> 
> How about daddy. Does it sound like darRy or RaRy?
> 
> The sound of '*dy*' in bo*dy* \?bä-d?\ and da*ddy* \?da-d?\ are the same.



To me, it does sound like "bari" and "dari" (although not as much for daddy).  And actually, if you were to write these in IPA, I think you would use the same symbol for the d in body as for the Spanish r.  They are both an alveolar tap.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alveolar_tap
I think that it is hard for English speakers to tell the difference between this sound and the regular d sound (no offense) because they are both allophones of the d sound, which means that English speakers think of them as the same sound.


----------



## NewdestinyX

Marodrey said:


> Thank you both for your explanations.
> 
> To have got.
> 
> "I to have got to get there soon?" Is that the proper way? NO (without the 'to') this is what I meant. "You to have got to finish quickly" The "to" particle makes the verb in its infinitive form, right? (Sí, pero, tal como en español, cuando se conjuga el verbo el 'to', tal como el '-ar,-er,-ir', desaparece.)
> 
> As I explained before, I am a spanish native speaker. What I didn't say is that I have NEVER had formal studies of english, I merely speak it. This is why I accept any correction and thank it. I didn't know, (or perhaps remember) that English must be written in Capital letters. Thank you.
> 
> Of course radio must be better. I am pretty sure that the differences in speach between young and old, is not the pronunciation but mostly the language.



Tener algo = to have something (inglés del EE.UU. y Inglaterra)
Tener algo = to have got something (en EE.UU. coloquial)
Haber recibido/agarrado/cogido algo = to have got something (Inglaterra)
Haber recibido/agarrado/cogido algo = to have gotten something (EE.UU.)_ {Ojo Ambos 'got' y 'gotten' son participios pasados del 'get' y son correctos pero por la tendencia, en el EE.UU., a preferir 'to have got'  = tener -- podría haber ambegüedades en usar 'got' como el participio en el EE.UU. Por tanto -- se prefiere 'have gotten'. _

Tiene muchos amigos.
He has many friends. (EE.UU. y inglaterra)
He's got many friends. (EE.UU. coloquial)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Has/Have got to* -- es un verbo modal como: 'querer', tener que' en español. Esto es diferente que lo que estuvimos hablando antes.

Has/Have got to (sin 'to' ante 'have') = Has/Have to = Tener que

Tien*e* que salir temprano.
He [ha*s* to/ha*s* got to] leave early.
Tien*en* que salir temprano.
They [ha*ve* to/ha*ve* got to] leave early.

¿Entendés?

Un saludo,
Grant


----------



## virgilio

marodrey,
             Now I'm completely confused. Did you perhaps mean that no speaker of good English ever says "to have got"? It would be rather odd, if you did.
For example,
"I'll have to take a taxi, when I get off the train because I need to have got home, before she arrives".

A little _recherché, _I agree, but perfectly good English.

Secondly, you are quite right that putting the preposition "to" in front of "have got" would normally represent an infinitive mode but then you seem to imply that infinitives are _verbs_. Or have I perhaps misunderstood you?
It is difficult to see how that could be so. 
It all really depends on what you mean by a verb, of course.
Let us take a simple example:
"If it starts to rain, we will need to return home quickly to change our clothes."
If - as I do - you find that this sentence contains 2 verbs, there's a chance that we might understand each other. If you find more than 2 (5 perhaps!), then from the point of view of syntax we inhabit different planets.

But, as I say, I may have misunderstood you.

With best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## Marodrey

I understand. 

The original question was not posted by me. This other person asked if you use "to have got" or if it is replaced by "to have".

Thanks to the many explanations, I will have no longer any doubts.

I tried to explain, and was misunderstood, which means I must not have made myself clear.

I have got to make clearer quotes. 
I have got to give many thanks to all the people who are interested in helping with second language skills.
We have got to find the original person and see if she got it. ;-)


----------



## Alan Oldstudent

tenseconds said:


> To me, it does sound like "bari" and "dari" (although not as much for daddy).  And actually, if you were to write these in IPA, I think you would use the same symbol for the d in body as for the Spanish r.  They are both an alveolar tap.  (_Link to Wikipedia article in original post_)
> I think that it is hard for English speakers to tell the difference between this sound and the regular d sound (no offense) because they are both allophones of the d sound, which means that English speakers think of them as the same sound.


That's a very interesting link. I'll have to check that out more closely later. I may have to change my opinion, based on that.

However, I think the "d" in English is rather different than the "d" in Spanish. The Spanish accent I'm most familiar with is Mexican, having grown up very close to the Mexican-US border.

Regards,

Alan


----------



## Marodrey

Thank you Virgilio for your time.

So infinitive modes are not verbs?


----------



## NewdestinyX

virgilio said:


> marodrey,
> Now I'm completely confused.



I've never realized it before, Virg, but 'have got' is a very different thing between British and American English and it must be enormously difficult to differentiate for the foreigner. Most Europeans learn British English too -- so all the more trouble if they watch American television or visit here.. ;-)

Grant


----------



## hfpardue

Have _and _Have got are very common in the United States.
You've _got_ to start on your project.
You _have_ to start on your project.
= _Tienes_ que empezar a trabajar en tu proyecto.


----------



## NewdestinyX

hfpardue said:


> Have _and _Have got are very common in the United States.
> You've _got_ to start on your project.
> You _have_ to start on your project.
> = _Tienes_ que empezar a trabajar en tu proyecto.



That's where I think the non native confusion comes in, Hf. Actually in your opening like there -- to be very technical we should tell the non natives that:

"Have *to*" and "Have got *to*" are very common... And then give the examples with 'tener que'.

Because just as common is the non-modal form.
He has a book. = He's got a book. = Tiene un libro.

I think that's what makes the non-native's head spin.. ;-)

Regards,
Grant


----------



## virgilio

Marodrey,
             You are very welcome. As I say, it all depends on how you define a verb. That, I suggest, is one of the most central questions that any would-be grammarian must answer. Almost his whole system of syntax will depend on his answer.
In my system, based largely on traditional syntax, infinitives cannot be verbs for they are the names of verbs and names are substantives - a fact corroborated by their use in Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian as masculine substantives:
el fumar puede dañar la salud  
dal dire al fare c'è di mezzo il mare
Le jouer du piano me plaît

and in German they are neuter substantives:
Das rauchen gefällt mir nicht

For me the evidence is conclusive, for others less so.
"Yer pays yer penny an' yer takes yer choice", as the fellow said.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## virgilio

NDX,
       I think that your "Most Europeans learn British English too -- so all the more trouble if they watch American television or visit here" may be underestimating the mental agility of our European neighbours.
 I'm sure they've got a few grey cells to rub together, when they have to!

All the best
Virg


----------



## NewdestinyX

virgilio said:


> NDX,
> I think that your "Most Europeans learn British English too -- so all the more trouble if they watch American television or visit here" may be underestimating the mental agility of our European neighbours.
> I'm sure they've got a few grey cells to rub together, when they have to!
> 
> All the best
> Virg



LOL!! As usual you take my words to a place they were never headed. Most of my Spanish friends have told me some of their biggest problems were in having to relearn their British English from school when they interact with a predominantly American cultured media and products, etc. But they certainly have plenty of gray cells. That's not the issue at all of course. ;-)

And you make a great point about 'infinitives'. Oddly -- this time I agree. ;-)

Grant


----------



## Marodrey

Thank you very much, again.

I made a comment the other day to someone about translating. So often we take similar words for similar meaning whan it is not so, but gladly there are places such as these where we can ask about it and get all sorts of answers! 

I think the main difference between have got to, and have to, is a sort of urge you give to it. "I have to make my self clear. I have got to!"


----------



## hfpardue

Marodrey said:


> Thank you very much, again.
> 
> I made a comment the other day to someone about translating. So often we take similar words for similar meaning whan it is not so, but gladly there are places such as these where we can ask about it and get all sorts of answers!
> 
> I think the main difference between have got to, and have to, is a sort of urge you give to it. "I have to make my self clear. I have got to!"


 
I agree.


----------



## Marodrey

On the matter of accents or usage, there are certain difficulties that are overcome after a few days when hearing and understanding a new language, that is if a person is in the first stages of learning a language.

At first, especially for people who still think in their native language and then translate to speak, it is almost impossible to understand because they are expecting the people in the streets to speak as clearly and smoothly as the teacher does.

As I mentioned at some point, I have always spoken english, not learned it in schools, but with american influences, so when the chance arrived to ask questions to move in Heathrow, I had to ask everything twice! Even for people traveling to counries where the same language is spoken, the first encounters are of continuous repetitions! 

Even the syntax of phrases can change. So I don't think it's a problem of fellow Europeans when listening for the first time to american english, its something that happens to everyone.


----------

