Haven't vs. doesn't have

Question

Well, these are the very basics. I would like to make myself 100% clear about this.

(1) "I doesn't have that car." - Correct for sure

(2) "I haven't got that car." - Correct for sure

(3) "I doesn't have got that car." - Incorrect for sure

(4) "I haven't that car." - I am not sure of its incorrectness in the old times, as I've seen it maybe in the old writings, but I am rather mistaken

(5) "Have you that car?" - Once I've heard this question. The person who expressed such a question was holding the opinion that the question is correct. Was he wrong at all, wasn't he?

Thank you in advance.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

(1) "I doesn't have that car." - Correct for sure Oops! Not correct. I don't have a car.

(2) "I haven't got that car." - Correct for sure Not correct. I haven't got a car.

(3) "I doesn't have got that car." - Incorrect for sure Yes, for sure! And I don't have got a car is also wrong.

(4) "I haven't that car." - I am not sure of its incorrectness in the old times, as I've seen it maybe in the old writings, but I am rather mistaken It's I haven't a car. Chiefly British. Only one in a million Americans might use it. My understanding is that even the British are using it less these days.

(5) "Have you that car?" - Once I've heard this question. The person who expressed such a question was holding the opinion that the question is correct. Was he wrong at all, wasn't he? It's Have you a car? and it's also chiefly British.
__________________

The demonstrative 'that' is not appropriate in the reading that I believe you are thinking of. If there is really a car present that you're asking about, the formulas are these:

Is that car yours?
That car is (not) mine.

CJ

RandomGuy · Answer

Marold(1) "I doesn't have that car." - Correct for sure

It's wrong. You do not have that car, not does not.

? I don't have that car.

Marold(2) "I haven't got that car." - Correct for sure

Yes, this is correct.

Marold(3) "I doesn't have got that car." - Incorrect for sure

Yes, this is incorrect for sure. Doesn't should be don't, and got has no business being there.

? I don't have that car.

Marold(4) "I haven't that car." - I am not sure of its incorrectness in the old times, as I've seen it maybe in the old writings, but I am rather mistaken
(5) "Have you that car?" - Once I've heard this question. The person who expressed such a question was holding the opinion that the question is correct. Was he wrong at all, wasn't he?

I'm pretty sure they're both correct, but no one really talks like that anymore.

Fivejedjon · Answer

MaroldWell, these are the very basics. I would like to make myself 100% clear about this.(1) "I doesn't have that car." - Correct for sure(2) "I haven't got that car." - Correct for sure(3) "I doesn't have got that car." - Incorrect for sure(4) "I haven't that car." - I am not sure of its incorrectness in the old times, as I've seen it maybe in the old writings, but I am rather mistaken(5) "Have you that car?" - Once I've heard this question. The person who expressed such a question was holding the opinion that the question is correct. Was he wrong at all, wasn't he?Thank you in advance.

#1 is 100% incorrect. Can you see why?

#2 is grammatically correct, though it is not easy to think of contexts in which it might be uttered. (OK, I have thought of some, but I suspect that few learners would need them.)

#3 is Wrong. Very wrong!

#4: I am an 'I haven't' person, but I cannot think of a situation in which I would ever say, "I haven't that car". I might well say, "I haven't a car", but I am old

#5. I am a 'have you..?' person, but I cannot think of a situation in which I would ever say, "Have you that car". I might well say, "Have you a car?"

RandomGuy · Answer

CalifJim(2) "I haven't got that car." - Correct for sure Not correct. I haven't got a car.

CalifJimIt's I haven't a car.

CalifJimIt's Have you a car?

Well, this did not occur to me. Although your revisions are much more common and admittedly the demonstratives make the sentences read a bit awkwardly, I don't think they're technically incorrect.

CalifJim · Answer

Aspara GusAlthough admittedly the demonstratives make the sentences read a bit awkwardly, I don't think they're technically incorrect.

Answering these forum questions sometimes means guessing at the reading that the OP has in mind. I took the risk of assuming that the OP was formulating questions about whether someone had any car at all rather than whether a particular car within the conversational setting (that car) belonged to someone.

It's always a balancing act. Sometimes you win; sometimes you lose. It sometimes takes a few more posts of discussion to discover the real situation the OP is attempting to portray in language, so I always rely on the fact that the OP can write back to clarify some points if he or she feels my answer is somehow misdirected.
______

No, I don't think the sentences with the demonstrative are technically incorrect either, but there are a great many sentences that fall into that category, and they are not really usable without a fairly contrived scenario to go with them. Given that the learner who is thinking in terms of such a contrived scenario is very rare, I usually go with the assumption that those sentences are "incorrect" in the intended reading.

CJ

Fivejedjon · Answer

Aspara GusI don't think they're technically incorrect.

What do you mean by 'technically incorrect', Aspara Gus?

If you mean that it does not break any of the grammatical 'rules' that you can find in style guides, then I suppose you are right. However, if this means that you end up with a sentence that few native speakers would ever utter, is there any point in 'technical correctness'?

I am shaving my bald cat's hairless onions is 'technically correct'. Does that make it acceptable in everyday chitchat?

If I was the man who she saw, then I'd have a tattoo on my buttocks is 'technically incorrect' . Are there many people (apart from those who object to the exposure of naked buttocks that allowed this to be uttered) who would worry about the grammar of this utterance?

RandomGuy · Answer

CalifJimAnswering these forum questions sometimes means guessing at the reading that the OP has in mind. I took the risk of assuming that the OP was formulating questions about whether someone had any car at all rather than whether a particular car within the conversational setting (that car) belonged to someone.
It's always a balancing act. Sometimes you win; sometimes you lose. It sometimes takes a few more posts of discussion to discover the real situation the OP is attempting to portray in language, so I always rely on the fact that the OP can write back to clarify some points if he or she feels my answer is somehow misdirected.
____
No, I don't think the sentences with the demonstrative are technically incorrect either, but there are a great many sentences that fall into that category, and they are not really usable without a fairly contrived scenario to go with them. Given that the learner who is thinking in terms of such a contrived scenario is very rare, I usually go with the assumption that those sentences are "incorrect" in the intended reading.
CJ

Ah, now I see. When answering questions here, I tend to focus on what is technically correct, in the interest of retaining the original poster's syntax. I should stop doing that.

Fivejedjon · Answer

Aspara GusWhen answering questions here, I tend to focus on what is technically correct, in the interest of retaining the original poster's syntax. I should stop doing that.

So what is 'technically correct'? Do you mean what some prescriptive grammarian wrote thirty years or more ago?

RandomGuy · Answer

fivejedjonWhat do you mean by 'technically incorrect', Aspara Gus?
If you mean that it does not break any of the grammatical 'rules' that you can find in style guides, then I suppose you are right. However, if this means that you end up with a sentence that few native speakers would ever utter, is there any point in 'technical correctness'?

See my previous post.

fivejedjonI am shaving my bald cat's hairless onions is 'technically correct'. Does that make it acceptable in everyday chitchat?

Oh, come now! Such an absurdity is hardly comparable to the original poster's technically correct examples.

fivejedjonIf I was the man who she saw, then I'd have a tattoo on my buttocks is 'technically incorrect' . Are there many people (apart from those who object to the exposure of naked buttocks that allowed this to be uttered) who would worry about the grammar of this utterance?

Not many, I expect, but I would probably nitpick at it.

CalifJim · Answer

Aspara GusWhen answering questions here, I tend to focus on what is technically correct, in the interest of retaining the original poster's syntax. I should stop doing that.

As for "stop doing that", I would say, "Not necessarily". It's always good to have someone point out these things. We just have to be careful not to mislead the OP into thinking that the technically correct sentence is one that he or she could use in any situation, or, more to the point, in the situation he or she has in mind. And to do that we sometimes need to read the OP's mind, or to dialog a little with the OP to find out what's on their mind.

CJ

Haven't vs. doesn't have

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions