The rooms have [of] ventilation

Omit 'of'. It makes nonsense of the sentence.

park sang joonThe rooms have of ventilation.I'd like to know what role "of" plays here.Thank you in advance for your help.

Is this sentence from an old book? I have a feeling that this "have of" may be an archaic phrasing.

As Rover says, to modern eyes it just looks wrong.

Thank you, GPY, for yout yet yet another so very kind answer from you.

Is this sentence from an old book?

park sang joonYes, it is the like of an old book. It is to translate an very old Korean book into English

When was the translation into English made?

I'm so sorry; I know a little of the source.
It looks like it was a hundred and something years ago.

park sang joonI'm so sorry; I know a little of the source.It looks like it was a hundred and something years ago.

Depending on the value of "something", that may not be far enough back for what I am thinking of, assuming I'm right anyway, which I'm not 100% sure about.

park sang joonThe rooms have of ventilation.

If that's the whole sentence, it's not correct in modern English.

Might it be part of a larger sentence with a somewhat literary structure?

I have no idea what [means / method] the rooms have of ventilation.

FOR I have no idea what [means / method] of ventilation the rooms have.