English usage and grammar

363 readers

1 users here now

A community to discuss and ask questions about English usage and grammar.

If your post refers to a specific English variant, please indicate it within square brackets (for instance [Canadian]).

Online resources:

Cambridge English Dictionary
Merriam-Webster Dictionary and Thesaurus
Gilman's Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. This is a great and witty reference about usage, its history, and its controveries

Sibling communities:

[email protected]

Rules of conduct:

The usual ones on Lemmy and Mastodon.. In short: be kind or at least respectful, no offensive language, no harassment, no spam.

(Icon: entry "English" in the Oxford English Dictionary, 1933. Banner: page from Chaucer's "The Wife of Bath's Tale".)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Have got vs Have (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi folks.

Can I ask: Is it better to say “We’ve got to get going” or “ We have to get going”?

I hear the former in conversation and it slightly irks me. I think it’s because of the redundancy (?) in the sentence. Which is better, grammatically? The latter feels cleaner. Am I wrong?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If I remember correctly, "have got to" is more informal than "have to". So yeah, it's cleaner/more grammatical.

I think most people use the "got" as a extra word to emphasize urgency in day to day conversation. So in that way, it's useful?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm also in camp of "the longer the angrier". Next in the escalation list would be "our ass", followed by "fxxking"