Subj : Have not or didn't have
To   : alexander koryagin
From : Anton Shepelev
Date : Wed Oct 04 2017 23:38:14

Alexander Koryagin:
AK>>> I read in a novel by Judith Wright:
AK>>>
AK>>>   Driving  away,  John  Condon  was  the minor
AK>>>   business-man again.  He had not much time to
AK>>>   get to town for that appointment.
AK>>>
AK>>> I  heard  that if you had a real thing you say
AK>>> "I had it", but if it was not a real thing you
AK>>> should  say  "I didn't have it". But "time" is
AK>>> not a real thing? ;-) Is there a more accurate
AK>>> rule?
AS>>
AS>> In  classic  literary English "not" negates the
AS>> verb it follows.  You shall find plentiful  ex-
AS>> amples  in such disparate writers as Lewis Car-
AS>> rol, Arthur Conan Doyle, and Emily Bronte.
AK>
AK> I asked where is preferable to use "I have  not"
AK> instead of "I don't have" and vice versa.

No,  your  question  was specifically about a "rule"
you heard about and whether there was a  more  accu-
rate one -- see above.

The  concept  of preference is vague.  It depends on
one's taste and the desired style.  I answered  from
the viewpoint of bare grammar.

AK> Both terms mean denying of possession.

Denial  of  posession.  In general, the true noun is
preferable to the -ing form.

AS>> The rule you quoted is superficial  and  purely
AS>> mnenomic,  for it provides neither deep insight
AS>> into the "make" of the language nor any kind of
AS>> rationale.  Shun such rules like the plague and
AS>> study the language instead of drilling  ill-de-
AS>> vised  pseudo-rules,  whose  only  value  is in
AS>> helping poor IELTS and TOEFL students pass  the
AS>> tests.
AS>>
AS>> To  get  a  feeling  of what true study grammar
AS>> looks like, try reading some  Folwer  or  Goold
AS>> Brown:
AS>>
AS>>   http://www.bartleby.com/116/213.html
AS>>   http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/11615/pg11615-images.html
AK>
AK> It is too late to eat in such large portions.  I
AK> prefer to nibble it.  ;-)

Some things you can't nibble,  for  they  come  down
smooth  only  in hearty lumps.  The more complicated
the subject, the longer attention span you need.

AS>> I should with pleasure recommend more contempo-
AS>> rary  works, but I know none that show the same
AS>> level of coherence and discipline as these  old
AS>> books do.
AK>
AK> I often ask just to talk.

Do  you  this  time?   It is my fast conviction that
talk is cheap unless supported  by  intensive  study
and  reading.   As  talent is 1% inspiration and 99%
perspiration, so is the mastering of any  knowledge:
conversation  should  form the icing on the very tip
of the iceberg of reading :-) I for one feel  myself
able  to  say  or  write something after I have read
many times as much on the subject, or, if it  is  my
original work, after I have spent many days working.
A ten-page article  may  be  the  fruit  of  several
months  of  hard work.  I can even talk about it for
about fifteen minutes, but fifteen  minutes  is  in-
significant in comparison to several months.

AK> Google  has killed good companies.  Google knows
AK> all, and I don't like it.

As one Russian scientist said, "There are  thousands
of books in my library, but it is I who is a profes-
sor of mathematics, not my bookcase."

AK> There was time when people preferred  live  con-
AK> versations  instead  of asking robots or getting
AK> URLs.

They used libraries and  reading  rooms  instead  of
robots  and  URLs.   There  was a time, and not very
long ago, when our  country  was  the  most  reading
country  in the world.  Editions of 200-300 thousand
were normal, whereas nowadays they run  around  five
thousand.

---
 * Origin: *** nntp://fidonews.mine.nu *** Finland *** (2:221/6.0)

.