59

I feel uncomfortable saying sentences like the following:

  • "I've a car" instead of "I have a car"
  • "They've a great time" instead of "They have a great time"
  • "He's a pen" instead of "He has a pen"
  • etc

I ask this because I read this sort of thing in a book.

Are they correct? And what is the rule? Can you use such forms in a formal setting?

RegDwigнt
  • 97,231
serg
  • 5,101
  • 4
    @serg555: Would you expect anything less on a site for grammar enthusiasts!? – Daniel LeCheminant Aug 05 '10 at 20:12
  • 3
    I've a car sounds British. – OneProton Sep 14 '10 at 17:57
  • 17
    He's a pen, sounds more like He is a pen. – Joe D Sep 23 '10 at 15:49
  • Hmm. So We've a long way to go in the UK, before we reach US linguistic standards? I know Americans favour inserting got there, but is that a closely-observed rule? – FumbleFingers May 21 '11 at 18:01
  • I think both of them are correct – misho Sep 14 '10 at 12:22
  • @JoeD, Well, depends on context and the aural tone used by the speaker. – Pacerier Nov 05 '15 at 13:27
  • @FumbleFingers, ? What were you talking about? – Pacerier Nov 05 '15 at 13:27
  • @Pacerier: I was simply making the point (with a lame attempt at humorously conflating use/mention) that We've a long way to go is (still?) a perfectly valid usage in BrE. You're apparently sceptical of Nohat's assertion that you can't contract "have" if you are using it as a plain verb (in AmE), which I've no reason to question myself. Four years ago I probably thought my usage was a "plain verb" that should be "acceptable" in AmE, but looking at it again now I think it's more of an "auxiliary verb" usage anyway. – FumbleFingers Nov 08 '15 at 14:50

9 Answers9

30

To an American ear, it sounds awkward, but in British English, this is not uncommon. Ironically, a Brit will probably tell you that the correct form is "I have got a small dog".

Peter Eisentraut
  • 3,527
  • 2
    So the speakers in America don't use "I have got a small dog" at all? – Martin Vseticka Aug 05 '10 at 20:23
  • 14
    @Marty: Generally, no, I'd say. You're much more likely to hear either "I have a small dog" (which is what's regarded as "correct") or "I've got a small dog". – Adam Robinson Aug 05 '10 at 20:26
  • 1
    I've never heard I've used this way, and I've been trying to notice this sort of thing since I moved to London. I've heard I've got many times though and I'd regard that as "correct". – configurator Sep 29 '10 at 03:13
  • 1
    @configurator: It might actually be more of a written thing. Newspapers and such use it quite a bit. In speech, when you talk about what you have, you probably often use a bit of emphasis somewhere, so the contraction doesn't come into play very clearly. – Peter Eisentraut Sep 29 '10 at 10:53
  • 8
    Americans say I’ve got all the time. Here are some things Americans have got: a secret; your back; skills; the power. – Jason Orendorff Oct 18 '11 at 22:04
  • "Have got" and "'ve got" are very common in America. And incorrect, IMO. Consider the poster child of bad grammar in movie titles, set in New York City: You've Got Mail, whose title is, ironically, borrowed from a popular dialog box from America Online. – Flimzy Oct 15 '14 at 16:20
  • @PeterEisentraut, Is "I have got a small dog" is valid and fully grammatical? – Pacerier Nov 05 '15 at 13:28
  • 1
    @Flimzy Why do you call 'have got' incorrect? – Angelos Jul 05 '16 at 13:25
  • @Flimzy No, 'got' is a past tense of 'get', which mean 'acquire' or obtain - whereas 'have' means 'possess'. For 'to have acquired' to shift to 'to possess' is a perfectly reasonable (and old, having been used by Shakespeare) change. – Angelos Jul 05 '16 at 19:02
  • As a Brit, I'd say that "I have got a small dog" would almost always be contracted to "I've got a small dog" unless emphasis were needed. Or you were playing Jeeves (and I'm not so sure even he'd say that). – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '17 at 20:26
  • @Flimzy Isn't it just present perfect? – Necronomicron May 20 '20 at 19:08
28

This is definitely an American English/British English thing, as you can't do it in American English but you can in British English.

In American English, you can't contract "have" if you are using it as a plain (not a "helping" or "auxiliary") verb. "I've a dog" and "They've a great time" are not grammatical in American English.

There are a number of other restrictions on contractions of "have" besides the one you cite. For example, you can't use contracted "have" followed by "not": "I've not been there" is not grammatical in American English even though "I've been there" is—if you want to contract, you have to say "I haven't been there".

I discussed this in a question about I’ven’t.

Community
  • 1
nohat
  • 68,560
16

I think what you feel uncomfortable with is contraction of "have" as a main verb. When it's an auxiliary verb in, say, a perfect, contraction feels fine:

I've had a car before.

But contraction of main verb "have" meaning to own or possess feels weirder.

?And I've a car right now.

However, I have a feeling that people will contract main verb have in British English, but take that with a grain of salt. Americans faced with some kind of strange usage are far too willing to blame it on British English.

JoFrhwld
  • 1,584
  • 5
    You are correct this is a British English thing. Contraction of non-auxiliary have is possible in British English but not in American English. – nohat Sep 14 '10 at 17:27
  • 2
    @nohat: agreed - though only in some regions (as a former Londoner, I would never use "I've" in that context). You also see it in older literature. – Steve Melnikoff Sep 14 '10 at 19:55
  • In my neck of the woods, a parent might well say I've a few things to say to you, young lady! to an to a recalcitrant teenage daughter. – FumbleFingers Jul 20 '11 at 18:01
7

I think "I've a car" is fine, but unusual on its own: as part of a longer sentence it's unexceptionable: "I've a car in the garage".

I suspect this is for prosodic reasons: "I've a car" has no word you can stress, other than "car", so people tend to change it to either "I have a car" or "I've got a car".

The other case is different: I can't think of any examples where I would expect to find "he's a pen", though I would rate it as perfectly grammatical.

Colin Fine
  • 77,173
  • 2
    Again, as part of a larger construction, '... he's a pen that cost over 300 pounds' would be acceptable colloquially in the UK. These contractions wouldn't be used in sentence- or sentence-fragment-terminal position. – Edwin Ashworth May 29 '15 at 09:01
  • With regard to your second para, what is the reason why a sentence's not possessing a word you can stress lead to people not finding it OK (and so, changing it)? – HeWhoMustBeNamed Jan 30 '20 at 16:04
  • 1
    @MrReality: Dunno. I noticed that I have a car, I've got a car and I've a car in the garage are all OK, but I've a car much less so, deduced that this was a prosodic issue, and speculated as to what the governing factor might be. Actually I've just realised that the short form can be natural in some contexts, eg answering a question: "Have you got anything in your pocket?" "I've a pen". – Colin Fine Jan 30 '20 at 20:50
  • I found a really amazing explanation for this here, which says every clause in English has a mandatory stress slot in the predicate (though that raises another question, why is that so) and that stressed syllables cannot be syncopated; so if the reason it's awkward in AmE does have to do with stress & prosody, that oughta be it. But I'm confused why you say that "I've a car" has no words we can stress: Why can't we stress car, like we do pen in "I've a pen", in a similar context? – HeWhoMustBeNamed Jan 31 '20 at 15:59
4

They are both strictly correct but both slightly inelegant. The third especially could be confused with "He is a pen"

Some people like to avoid contractions like that in formal writing, but most people probably won't mind (or even notice).

It's probably wise to favour the contraction if you want to emphasise another part of the sentence: "I've never been so insulted!"

yoozer8
  • 8,752
Mark Pim
  • 149
3

"I've" seems fairly normal to me as British (or at least Scottish) English, and is completely unambiguous. I don't think this "he's" would ever be understood as "he has" rather than "he is".

Artyom Lugovoy
  • 531
neil
  • 1,816
2

It is rarely appropriate to use contractions in a formal writing environment.

I've heard the first construction in speech, mainly British English, but not the second.

Michael Scott Shappe
  • 930
0

Technically, there's nothing wrong with it, although Uncle Mikey is correct that it's rarely appropriate to use contractions in formal writing.

The only reason the second one seems strange is because most people would say "They're having a great time," I suppose because they're in the middle of having it. I have said, though, "I'd a great time..." I just happen to speak too quickly.:)

I also say "I've got..." rather than "I have." When I'm not speaking incorrectly, I generally just say "I've." So, it's not just a British thing.

kitukwfyer
  • 3,753
0

(I've) is a fine contraction, just in American English you can only use it to replace (I have) when 'have' is used as an auxiliary verb (eg: In conjunction with a past participle).

I've been there. (Correct) I've a dog. (Incorrect)

When the verb 'have' isn't auxiliary, It can't be contracted with pronouns.

Syed Wasif Ali
  • 9