Teacher Discussion Forums

Isn't this expressing necessity and not possession?

The boss had much ill-temper, laziness and tardiness to endure from his co-workers.

And are my conclusions correct below ?

"Everyone has a story to tell." = there's a story, a life's history, inside everyone (no necessity implied)

"I have a story to tell." = I am looking for an audience (necessity implied)

"I have a story which I can tell if you want me to, miss." (possessive)

I have no end of calls to make expresses the same as I have to make no end of calls. Do you agree?

And...

I have my correspondence to attend to, and I have to attend to my correspondence. No appreciable difference between them, right?

But here, there is a difference:

I have much money to spend and I have to spend much money.

How about here?

I am much busier now than I used to be;I have a (my) baby to look after now and ...... I have to look after a (my) baby now.

When you teach the form X has/have + obj + to + V, what do you tell the students regarding possession and necessity?

These are all abstract possessions and the necessity comes by virtue of their possession. This meaning is to all intents and purposes idiomatic. When I teach it, I treat it mearly as a collocation and don't go into whether anything is actually possessed or necessary. Comprehension questions also need not address this issue.

Andrew Patterson wrote:These are all abstract possessions and the necessity comes by virtue of their possession. This meaning is to all intents and purposes idiomatic. When I teach it, I treat it mearly as a collocation and don't go into whether anything is actually possessed or necessary. Comprehension questions also need not address this issue.

I might agree with you there, but students ask about the difference in use and meaning between:

I have to write a letter.

I have a letter to write.

What would be your advice to such questioners?

I'd say, "In the first you have a necessity to write the letter, the second possession of that letter which you are going to write, either way they amount to the same thing, NOW LET'S MOVE ON."

BTW, the on-line etymology dictionary says this about "have to":

To have to for "must" (1579) is from sense of "possess as a duty or thing to be done".

So in a sense, it's all possession.

Andrew Patterson wrote:I'd say, "In the first you have a necessity to write the letter, the second possession of that letter which you are going to write, either way they amount to the same thing, NOW LET'S MOVE ON."

BTW, the on-line etymology dictionary says this about "have to":

To have to for "must" (1579) is from sense of "possess as a duty or thing to be done".

So in a sense, it's all possession.

That sounds like a manipulation of terms. To possess a duty sounds ridiculous.

Ridiculous or not, I have no reason to doubt that this is the origin.

Andrew Patterson wrote:Ridiculous or not, I have no reason to doubt that this is the origin.

Ive just looked at that site. It mentions "to have to", but not "have + obj +`to + V".

I might agree with you there, but students ask about the difference in use and meaning between:

I have to write a letter.

I have a letter to write.

What would be your advice to such questioners?

I'd say the difference lies in emphasis, though different intonations would probably trump word order.

Does anyone detect a difference in meaning, no matter how slight, between these two?

I have a (my) baby to look after now.

I have to look after a (my) baby now.

Which would you choose and why? Maybe all three? But why?

Can't talk now, I have a man I must meet.

Can't talk now, I have a man I have to meet.

Can't talk now, I have a man to meet.

See my post about the things I have. "I have a man to meet" gets close to being both possession and obligation.

JuanTwoThree wrote:See my post about the things I have. "I have a man to meet" gets close to being both possession and obligation.

That sentence makes it easy to see how "have" for possession could morph into "have to" for obligation.

"That is the only reason he has to go."

"That is the only reason he has to go."


Obligative, or possessive?