1. The WordReference Forums have moved to new forum software. (Details)

Have [pronunciation / BE]

Discussion in 'English Only' started by giginho, Dec 7, 2012.

  1. giginho

    giginho Senior Member

    Svizzera / Torino
    Italiano & Piemontese
    Hello Everybody!

    I was reading this thread and this comment attracted my attention:

    Could you confirm the difference of pronuntiacion in BE and the non use of the contraction form?

    Thank you very much

    Gigi
     
  2. Cagey non modo mod

    California
    English - US
    Hello giginho. :)

    It seems to me that you have two questions:

    1) The pronunciation of 'have' in BE.
    Let us make this the topic of this thread.

    2) The contraction I've when have means possess.
    Please add any questions or comments on this second topic to this thread:
    Contraction of 'have' meaning 'possession'
    :)
     
  3. giginho

    giginho Senior Member

    Svizzera / Torino
    Italiano & Piemontese
    Hello Cagey,

    Thank you for the link you provided me! Let's go on with the first question, as you suggested.

    Cheers

    Giginho
     
  4. entangledbank

    entangledbank Senior Member

    London
    English - South-East England
    On the pronunciation, it's not a BrE thing, but it depends on the use/meaning of the verb. In the modal combinations 'have to' (= must), 'used to' (= formerly did), and 'supposed to' (= should) we use special pronunciations: 'have to' with [ft] and 'has to' with [st] and 'had to' with [tt]. (Likewise [st] in 'used to' and 'supposed to' when they have those modal meanings.) All accents of English do this. The verb is pronounced as if haftu or hafta, and always has the full vowel; this modal use is not contracted onto the preceding pronoun. (A few people do do this, but even in BrE it's a small minority.)
     
  5. giginho

    giginho Senior Member

    Svizzera / Torino
    Italiano & Piemontese
    Thank you very much entangledbank....now it's all clear!

    Merry Xmas!!!

    Giginho
     
  6. Einstein

    Einstein Senior Member

    Milano, Italia
    UK, English
    I agree about "used to" and "supposed to", where we have [st] unlike the normal pronunciation of these verbs, e.g. in "I supposed Tom was here" we have a [zdt] sound. But as for "have to" and "had to" I know there are a lot of people who say "haf to" and "hat to", but it's not universal; there are plenty of others who use the normal pronunciation of "have" and "had" as they would in "I have time" and "I had time". And I'm from south-east England like you, entangledbank!;)
     
  7. bearded man

    bearded man Senior Member

    Milan
    Italian
    Hello
    I know it is an old discussion, but I am curious to know the following: if in ''supposed to'' you pronounce st, can you really distinguish it from ''suppose to'' in pronunciation? Or are the two pronunciations identical and you only differentiate them based on the context?
    Thank you in advance.
     
  8. Cagey non modo mod

    California
    English - US
    We use 'supposed to' to express obligation or expectation. We don't use the present form [suppose to] in this context, so the problem is unlikely to arise.

    Or do you have a particular example in mind? If so, please give us the sentence. :)
     
  9. bearded man

    bearded man Senior Member

    Milan
    Italian
    @ Cagey
    ''Suppose to be (imperative: =suppose you are) surrounded by hungry wolves: what are you supposed to do?''
    I know it is not a splendid English, but I am mainly interested to know if there is a difference in pronunciation (-seto vs. -sedto).
     
  10. Cagey non modo mod

    California
    English - US
    We wouldn't say "suppose to be" in that context. It is ungrammatical and not something a native speaker would say.

    [We would say "suppose you are," or, less probably, "suppose yourself to be".]

    As is explained in post #6, the intended meaning of the verb affects the pronunciation.
     
  11. bearded man

    bearded man Senior Member

    Milan
    Italian
    Well I have to change my example then:
    Suppose tiny thorns had been found in your meatball, then what were you supposed to do?
    Would you pronounce -st- in both cases? Or rather -oze t- in the first case?
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2014
  12. Andygc Senior Member

    Devon
    British English
    'No', 'Yes', in that order.
     
  13. bearded man

    bearded man Senior Member

    Milan
    Italian
    Thank you, Andygc.
     

Share This Page