Re: re:have got

From: Douglas G. Kilday (fufluns_at_chorus.net)
Date: 07/26/04 

Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 01:12:39 -0000

"endipatterson" <endipatterson@yahoo-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote ...
>
> [...]
>
> "have got to go," seems a little harder to explain since it does not
> imply ownership. Perhaps it's the idea of being possessed, as in, "he
> was like a man possessed."

No, it is the idea of "having an obligation" to do something, which can be
found in other languages, e.g. Spanish "Tengo que ir" = E. "I have (got) to
go".

Old English <a:gan> 'to hold, possess' fell into a similar idiomatic usage.
The verb is preteritive-present but retains the strong participle <a:gen>
'possessed', whence E. <own>. From <a:gan> came Middle English <owen> 'to
possess' which acquired a special sense 'to have an obligation (to
someone)', whence E. <owe>. From the OE 1s/3s weak preterit <a:hte> came ME
<a(u)ghte>, <o(u)ghte>, serving as the 1s/3s preterit of <owen>, sometimes
expressing obligation impersonally: "him oghte" = "it behooved him". This
preterit then generated a new preteritive-present <a(u)ghten>, <o(u)ghten>
'to be obligated'. E. <ought> is thus historically a _double_
preteritive-present form, but since it represents OE <a:hte> 'held,
possessed' one may compare "I ought to go" with "I have got to go".

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bill Gates and Tsunamis
    ... One can possess something without ... "possess" is to have under one's immediate control. ... But the bond does not consist solely of that record. ... same as any ownable future obligation. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Bill Gates and Tsunamis
    ... >> you can and will possess ... >> obligation which you can possess, though it is more normal to possess ... >bond and the US has disallowed the new issuance of them since the early ... your false and stupid claims, above, there are most definitely bonds ...
    (sci.econ)
Quantcast