Which of the following statement sounds correct or more natural?
1.Smith has some difficulty to get himself understood.
2.Smith has some difficulty getting himself understood.
3.Smith has some difficulty in getting himself understood.
Printable View
Which of the following statement sounds correct or more natural?
1.Smith has some difficulty to get himself understood.
2.Smith has some difficulty getting himself understood.
3.Smith has some difficulty in getting himself understood.
2 and 3 sound normal. 1 sounds kind of weird.
If 1,2, and 3 were said at a normal conversational speed, it really wouldn't make much difference.
"Smith hazsm difficultyt getmself understood."
"Smith hazsm difficulty gettingmself understood."
"Smith hazsm difficultyn gettinmself understood."
They're all horrible. Horrible.
2 and 3 would be just about acceptable if you replaced 'getting himself' with 'making himself'. 'Get' is an ugly, ugly word. Ugly. Pravit has a point about the garbling, though: you know you've cracked the language when you can be indistinct succesfully in it.
If even the variation with 'making' is barely passable, how would you suggest it should be changed then? I think it's only because you see the same sentence three times and are forced to analyse them, that it gets on your nerves. If you think too hard about the words 'helpful' or 'clock' or 'fridge' you can also go crazy. I agree that the first sentence is the worst though.
Smith needs to pull himself together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasper May
Now I can hear that French accent of yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by joysof
I could've expected something like that... :)
Hehehehe...
I have a bone to pick with "fridge." (There's a sentence you'll never think you'll say!) Why is is spellt with a d when refrigerator isn't? Well I suppose frige would look weird... anyway... *scarpers off to next forum*
Could you say what's French here? I'm awfully interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by bad manners
I really do think the word "get" could be eliminated from the English langauge without it suffering any ill effects. I can't think of any example where "get" can't be replaced by a more active, descriptive verb. I suppose there may be a few, but, eh.Quote:
Originally Posted by joysof
Yeah, but it sounds like the way people talk. For example, when narrating conversations, many American youth will say something similar to this:
And then I was like, "xxx"
Then he was like, "xxx"
Then I'm like, "xxx"
Then he's all like, "xxx"
Then I'm all, "xxx"
Also, you can say "ummmmmmmmmm" and "uhhhhh" for long periods of time without sounding weird. If you don't know what something is called just call it a "thing."
:lol:
EDIT: And unless you're talking with Joysof, if you say "Smith has some trouble getting himself understood", most English speakers won't stop and exclaim "Oh! That was simply horrible! Horrible!" The point is you will get yourself understood even if you say something like "Smith having some troubles get understand."
"Smith has some trouble getting himself understood" sounds ok to me...mabye thats because last year my English teacher was a total moron and got himself fired because he was such a moron.
You capitalized His name!?.... :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Pravit
Is outrage!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tu-160
I'm sick and tired of this Smith character. He needs to sort his life out and learn some of the local lingo!! :evil:
:lol:
Anyway, what is wrong with being understood, rather than 'getting yourself understood' which doesn't sound like normal usage to me?
To Friendy: actually I think bm's comment is very deep .. bas et profond :wink:
We have all these old Germanic little words like 'get', from which we form a plethora of indecipherable phrasal verbs (just to throw off the non-natives, of course).. at the same time we have plenty of Latin-based words (usually inherited via the French language).
I can't come up with a good list right now, but things like:
get -> receive
put out -> extinguish (e.g. cigarette)
hold out -> extend
well these aren't very good examples, but there are millions of them, trust me.
A key feature of native Romance language speakers, when they learn English, is that they tend very strongly to use the latter forms, whereas natives tend to use the former.
:D ! This is nothing. I once saw a site for ESL learners (I'm a native speaker, but I wanted to see what they were teaching) and it told those poor non-natives that "Has John got a motorcycle" is correct and proper English.
And why not? Other than the fact that the "?" has been ommitted of course!
"Has John got a motorcycle?" is colloquial slang. Learners of a language should be taught how to say things right.
Does John have a motorcycle?
Colloquial perhaps, but not slang. There's nothing wrong about using "get" in my opinion (which means joysof will say the opposite soon unless he can resist it), but it does sound rather inelegant. From a style point of view, it's best not to use it in formal writing, but in speech it's about as common, if not more so, as the alternative, so I see no reason why they shouldn't teach it.
Except that the proper participle is "gotten." "Got" has become acceptable through common use in England, but it is not yet considered acceptable in American grammar, so I would recommend using "gotten," as it is possible to use in both dialects. "Has John gotten a motorcycle?" The use of got is common, but incorrect in American English. I see no problem with teaching it to non-native speakers, seeing as how is common in casual speech, but they should be aware that it would not be acceptable in certain more formal contexts.
The 3rd form of get is got in British English (not 'gotten'), and gotten in American English. It is absolutely necessary, in my opinion, to teach both, and I always do.
(e.g.: see Murphy "English Grammar in Use")
As to umania's original assertion, I'm afraid that's just ridiculous.
If you said "Has John got a motorcycle?," I would look at you funny. It is not in common usage, at least not where I live.
OK well my use of the word 'ridiculous' was a bit strong. Anyway, where I come from, 'Has John got..' is normal usage, to the extent that 'Does John have' sounds slightly formal (although, of course, never wrong).
There is at least one really interesting question here, I didn't mean to be dismissive..
Of course it is in common usage. Christ. Perhaps there should be some kind of test to determine participants' fitness to dispense information in this section of the forum? The average native speaker evidently knows sod all about the English language and, worse, seems intent on disseminating his stupidity. Dispiriting, that.Quote:
Originally Posted by umania
If you read more carefully, you would have seen me say, "at least where I live." Maybe in "Moscou" (your location) the English speakers do use it often. I think I would know what is and is not used in the language I speak and hear every day.
Wow, zing! He sure told you, joysof. :roll:
Umania, "has got" is accepted normal usage in Britain, to the point that "has gotten," the original past participle, is considered archaic and even sounds incorrect, I believe. In any case, it is not considered a dire grammatical error in the UK. Perhaps someone who is actually British can back me up or correct me on this one.
Just because it is not common usage in your area does not make it wrong. Amazingly, English is spoken in many places other than your location!
Oh dear.
joysof - come on, that's both silly and elitist, and also offensive. I made the mistake of using language like 'ridiculous', but I retracted it. It won't help any of the people who read this if we just start insulting each other.
umania, I understand why you felt the need to respond like that, but it wasn't such a great idea.
Let's not have another one of those fruitless p***ing contests about our use of English..
As far as I recall, joysof is from England and is bilingual English/French. I'm from London.
My suggestion: umania, let us know where you're from, and then let's just leave it at that. It would probably help if a few others, stating their locations (or at least where they learnt English), offered their opinion.
According to my grammar reference ("English Grammar in Use", R. Murphy, probably the most popular simple reference for teachers of English as a foreign language), the form 'I have got' = 'I have' is correct and normal in both American and British English. Of course it is somewhat informal, but not hugely (not slang). I won't bother to look it up somewhere else, that's going too far.
Oh and the other thing :
'Has he got' could mean 'does he have' or 'did he get'
so if I'm right we have 2 possibilities:
1 'Has he got' = 'Does he have' -> this would be OK in Am and Br. I use this a million times a day, personally. 'Has he got your phone number?'
2 'Has he got' = 'Did he get' (i.e. present perfect/past simple) - this case is much more confusing, because present perfect of 'get' is very similar in meaning to present simple of 'have'.
Americans would say it should be 'Has he gotten', I suppose (?) .. but it seems to me, on reflection, that we generally avoid that construction where I come from, and use the past simple 'Did he get'. I thought about this for some time, and I couldn't find any really natural examples of 'Has he got' with meaning 2 above..
ho hum
*removes double post*
British English very rarely uses "gotten." I agree with waxwing on usage there, although I do not claim to speak for Americans, either. In British English "gotten" is only used by those picking it up from Americans, perhaps without realising. "Got" is certainly not considered incorrect, as Lindzi rightly guesses.
*edits out typos*
I am from Phoenix, Arizona.
So, how would you ask a person :"have you got time to listen all this cr@p" or "do you have time to listen all this cr@p"? I remember how I helped a girl to start learning English and used the general "do you [verb]" construction, cause I was lazy at the time and didn't want to complicate things and explain her all these "have got" nuances. Another guy got angry over me and said "Why do you tell her this? This is americanism!" For some reasons he considered "American English" a deteriorated and improper form of British English, so according to him, "do you have" is an oversimplification of perhaps more idiomatic, but more conventional "have you got". What do you think of this?
No, it's normal usage. It sounds nicer. I'd tilt either way:
"Do you have a pen and some paper?"
"Have you got a pen and some paper?"
these both sound quite natural to me, though you wouldn't normally say "some" - the phrase "a pen and paper" sounds stupid to me though.
'Elitist' is fine by me. No retraction here.Quote:
Originally Posted by waxwing
Mmm. Lot of it about this week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Линдзи
Do you still know this guy? I would like to befriend him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Propp
I still know him. I'm afraid he doesn't remember this very episode but he's got a lot of another nice features. But you should befriend me first. Since we're both in Moscow (at least if what is written under your name is correct) it is not very hard to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by joysof
I still know him. I'm afraid he doesn't remember this very episode but he's got a lot of another nice features. But you should befriend me first. Since we're both in Moscow (at least if what is written under your name is correct) it is not very hard to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by joysof