4

I'm a native speaker but I saw a sentence on an internet post that started

If I've to work without (some resource) ...

I had to read it a couple times before I read it as

If I have to work without

Why is the former so hard to parse and the latter so automatically not a good place for a contraction?

Mari-Lou A
  • 27,037
  • 13
  • 72
  • 125
Dean MacGregor
  • 375
  • 1
  • 8
  • In the cited context - to have* to [do something]* - the highlighted word is often / usually enunciated as *haff* (and the corresponding past tense *had* as *hat). That's because it's effectively a different verb* (that just looks the same in the written form). And this word (or "version" of "that" word) isn't normally contracted - in fact, it's normally given extra stress (which probably explains why the final consonant changes). – FumbleFingers Dec 11 '22 at 18:16

2 Answers2

4

Because "I have" can only be contracted if "have" is used as an auxiliary verb in verb constructs.

You cannot say "I've a headache" or "I've to leave now". Contractions have particular constraints they have to meet: even "to be" requires the use of a subordinate clause when you want to use a contraction of its forms: you can write "I'm who I am" but not "I am who I'm". You can answer "who is the culprit?" with "Ms Smith's the culprit" or with "Ms Smith is" but not with "Ms Smith's".

  • 1
    I know all of those things intuitively or heuristically but not the "rules" behind them. Thanks. – Dean MacGregor Dec 11 '22 at 02:21
  • 9
    May also differ by region. I (and presumably the person who wrote the sentence in the question) have no problem with "I've a headache." – Luke Sawczak Dec 11 '22 at 05:11
  • 5
    Agree with "I've a headache" not presenting a problem (or the original sentence form that is being questioned for that matter). – SoronelHaetir Dec 11 '22 at 07:35
  • 1
    "I've a headache" is perfectly fine in speech and in texts. Native speakers say it all the time, and as listeners we automatically fill in the missing "had" in our heads. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22I%27ve+a+headache%22&sxsrf=ALiCzsYyl7XPzdf2AwxW1rh9d3NW_KMSgA:1670761651920&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxjZGWyPH7AhUHPuwKHYCHA2k4KBD8BSgCegQIAhAE&biw=1152&bih=637&dpr=2.5 – Mari-Lou A Dec 11 '22 at 12:33
  • 5
    The sentence "I've a headache" sounds British to me. In my experience, Americans don't usually contract "have" that way. – Tanner Swett Dec 11 '22 at 12:42
  • 1
    @Mari-LouA: Wait, "had"? Does that mean that, to your ear, "I've a headache" implies that the speaker does not (or at least may not) have a headache anymore? That's a new one to me. I wonder how widespread it is. (Or did you just mean to write "the missing 'got'" and mistyped?) – Ilmari Karonen Dec 11 '22 at 14:23
  • 1
    But Google Ngrams shows that “I’ve gone” is now more common than “I have gone.” It caught up gradually over the course of the twentieth century. So there is not a rule against contracting the helper verb have, in general. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 15:30
  • 6
    This answer is wrong on so many levels. Does British English not count? I've a cold. I've a small car. I've a lot of work to do. I've to give a presentation this afternoon. Anyhow: Pickup & Delivery Services in Tucson (Arizona) - I've a truck and trailer, can deliver whatever you need. Jacob D. $35.29/hr. – Michael Harvey Dec 11 '22 at 15:43
  • 1
    The previous answer evokes suspicion of it being ChatGPT-generated. Is it? – Peter Mortensen Dec 11 '22 at 15:56
  • 2
    @Michael Harvey: ChatGPT came to mind when I read it. – Peter Mortensen Dec 11 '22 at 15:59
  • @PeterMortensen No need to fret. Account deleted. –  Dec 11 '22 at 16:22
  • @Mari-LouA - 'as listeners we automatically fill in the missing "had" in our heads.' - I certainly don't do this. If someone says 'I've a headache' or 'You've a quizzical look on your face' they mean right now. – Michael Harvey Dec 11 '22 at 16:28
  • @Davislor "So there is not a rule against contracting the helper verb have, in general.": What are you referring to? The answer explicitly says that contractions for "have" are for auxiliary verb usage, and your example is such a case. –  Dec 11 '22 at 16:38
  • 1
    @MichaelHarvey - To me, I've to give a presentation this afternoon sounds so wrong (in Br.Eng.) You could say I 'ave to give a presentation this afternoon (just dropping the "h"), but never contract it. Your other examples are OK though. – Greenonline Dec 11 '22 at 16:47
  • @user107063 The original, “I have to work,” also uses have as an auxiliary verb, modifying an infinitive. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 16:54
  • @Davislor Nope, just like in "I beg to differ", "beg" is not an auxiliary verb but the main verb of the clause, taking an subordinate infinite clause. Auxiliary verbs are used for forming modes and tenses. In "I have to work", "have" is the main verb. In "I have worked", "have" is an auxiliary verb. –  Dec 11 '22 at 17:12
  • @user107063 Have to (or beg to) is is like a main verb in some ways and like an auxiliary in others. Semantically, the main verb in “beg to differ” is differ, and this matches some aspects of the grammar as well: we can answer “Do you beg to differ?” or “Beg you to differ?” with “I do not differ,” but “I do not beg to,” would be a word salad and “I do not beg,” would just be grammatically wrong in that context. They’re the kind of answers Eliza would give, but not GPT-3. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 17:22
  • @user107063 The phrase have to is a bit more modal than beg to (you could answer “Do you have to leave?” with “I have to.”) but not as much so as ought to. (We cannot say, “Do you ought to?” at all; it’s “Ought you to?”) – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 17:26
  • @Mari-LouA Whereas “He’s a headache,” would mean something else entirely? – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 18:05
  • P.S I haven't read all the comments but I forgot to add that "I've a headache" could be "I've [had] headache for the last two days", referring to the past obviously, or "I've [got]headache" referring to the present. If someone else has said the same, apologies for overlooking this bit, for some reason I didn't write got down when I was clearly thinking of it. And I still think in speech we as listeners tend to fill the gaps that occur in fast casual speech, not every syllable is uttered, in speech. – Mari-Lou A Dec 11 '22 at 18:06
  • EDIT @Davislor, in isolation I would be hugely confused by "He's a headache“ but in a suitable context, who knows? I think the author was typing exactly what they were thinking, i.e. If I've [had/got] to work without … and that's how it came out. – Mari-Lou A Dec 11 '22 at 18:09
  • 2
    @Greenonline - using 'I've to do something' as a contraction of 'I have to do something is pretty old-fashioned in British English, and is mainly said by the upper classes since 1940 or so, but it is definitely not 'wrong'. They say it more in Scotland and Ireland still. Please tell me when you're due to arrive Fri. as soon as poss., as I've to go up and tell Miss Sansom on Thursday (Rudyard Kipling, Just So Stories, 1902) – Michael Harvey Dec 11 '22 at 18:35
  • @Greenonline - _12 MAY

    Mam, out of sympathy for the fact that I was always last to be picked for the choir or the football team at school, has signed me up with the SAS. She thought it stood for Salvation Army Singers. I received the papers this morning and told her I’ve to go to Baghdad. She said, ‘Couldn’t you just go to the Alhambra on Armley Road?’_ Sebastian Faulks, Pistache, 2006, (a collection of parodies of various writers, including, here, Alan Bennett, who is famously old fashioned, but not posh or upper-class).

     – Michael Harvey Dec 11 '22 at 18:38
  • @Greenonline - just look at any of the 'Famous Five' books by Enid Blyton. – Michael Harvey Dec 11 '22 at 18:45
  • @Mari-LouA In American English, “He’s a” always means “He is a,” not “He has a.” And a person who’s a headache is an annoyance. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 23:12
  • Should clarify that he’s can also be used for the perfect tense, as I’ve said before. That isn’t a possible interpretation here, though, since it is not followed by a past participle. – Davislor Dec 12 '22 at 01:06
  • 1
    @Peter Mortensen If one suspects that an answer was created using an Ai, including ChatGPT please flag the post for moderator attention. Tools are available tro mods which can confirm a strong probability of creation by ChatGPT, or refute such probability. – David Siegel Dec 12 '22 at 15:32
0

“I’ve to go,” and similar sentences, are correct English, but they’re not idiomatic American English. Searching in Ngrams shows that “I’ve to go,” turns up primarily in novels, spoken by characters who are supposed to have a pronounced dialect. “I’ve to leave,” on the other hand, seems to be regional, fairly common in books by authors with South Asian names.

I’ve only found one example of a non-fiction book using the exact phrase you’re asking about, “I’ve to work,” and it’s a self-help book whose grammar seems a little off to me. (Manifestation: Manifest Your Dream Life Full of Happiness by Michael Tolle and Eckhart Losier.)

Contracting the helper verb have is much more common in other contexts, especially the perfect tense. The Google Books corpus shows that “I’ve gone” slowly began catching up to “I have gone” around 1900 and is now more common, but “I have to go” is more than three hundred times as common as “I’ve to go.” From other comments, contracting have as a main verb is common in British but not American English.

So, I don’t know of any logical explanation. It’s just something that Americans never say.

Davislor
  • 8,459
  • 11
  • 42
  • 2
    "I've gone" and "I've to go" are not analogous. The function and meaning of the word "have" in the sentence "I have gone" are different from those of the word "have" in the sentence "I have to go." – shoover Dec 11 '22 at 16:42
  • 1
    @shoover They’re both auxiliary verbs paired with an infinitive or participle of the main verb. Not exactly the same, but pretty close. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 16:48
  • @Davisior You are conflating light verbs and auxiliary verbs. –  Dec 11 '22 at 17:57
  • @user107063 There’s no universally-agreed definition, but can you explain the relevance of the distinction here? – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 18:02
  • @Davislor The relevance is that it governs when use of contractions is grammatical. –  Dec 11 '22 at 18:09
  • You can't use Ngrams to track speech patterns. it's a pointless exercise. Written works and speech do not always go hand in hand. P.S Where are the links? – Mari-Lou A Dec 11 '22 at 18:12
  • Perfect have and have to pattern quite differently. Compare has he gone? and He hasn't gone with Does he have to go? and He doesn't have to go. (There are still a few speakers who will say Has he to go?, but it is almost dead, even in the Britain). And then there's hafta. – Colin Fine Dec 11 '22 at 18:52
  • @Mari-LouA I thought I was pretty clear that the Ngrams results were for “the Google Books corpus.” Is there a good way to track historical speech patterns? – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 23:14
  • @user107063 But we know that this contraction is used in many countries that have the same rules for “Have I?/Do I have to?” just not in America. So this category of “weak verbs” does not appear to govern when have can be contracted, at all. It appears to be a difference between dialects. – Davislor Dec 11 '22 at 23:17
  • "I've to go" means I must go. "I've gone" means, I went. – Dean MacGregor Dec 12 '22 at 00:32
  • @DeanMacGeegor Yes, I am aware. The point was that we do sometimes contract have. – Davislor Dec 12 '22 at 01:04
  • Answers should be self-contained. As a visitor or user I shouldn't have to Google Ngram, and figure out for myself the parameters you placed: American or British English, Fiction, Since 1800 or 1900 etc. Furthermore, how many of those results were false positives? Adding links supports and improves the answer. Ngram charts publications of all types but it does not record people's dialects, speech patterns, or modern-day speaking. Speech and writing are not equivalent to one another. – Mari-Lou A Dec 12 '22 at 09:09
  • “I've to” Ngram – Mari-Lou A Dec 12 '22 at 09:15
  • and https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=I%27ve+to+go%2CI+have+to+go&year_start=1950&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3 – Mari-Lou A Dec 12 '22 at 09:16