Jimmy Akin

Would you expect to find languages using a form of the verb "to go" to express intention? . . . or a form of the verb "to have" to express obligation?

Well, English does. In fact, you just read a sentence (the title of this post) where forms of those words appear in those senses.

They’re somewhat strange senses. Consider:

1. I am going to Rome.
2. I am going to visit Rome.
3. I am going to study now.

In the first sentence the verb "go" has its normal, literal sense of moving from one place to another. In the last sentence it clearly has a metaphorical meaning. You may be sitting in the chair where you plan to study when you say it and may not be physically going anywhere at all. The middle sentence is actually using the same metaphorical sense as the last one, but you may not have noticed it since the topic under discussion was a visit, which would involve moving from one place to another.

Now consider:

1. I have a book
2. I have a headache.
3. I have to study now.

In the first sentence the verb "have" is in its original, literal meaning of possessing a physical object. In the last sentence it has a clearly metaphorical meaning that speaks of an obligation (to study now) as if it were a physical object that could be possessed. The middle sentence also involves a metaphorical sense since headaches are not physical objects that can be possessed, though this is somewhat masked since "a headache" is more obviously a noun phrase than "to study now" is (though, in actuality, "to study now" is a noun phrase since it is based on the infinitive "to study" and infinitives are verbal nouns).

Pretty weird, huh? There’s no necessary connection between the verb and the metaphor that is built out of it. That’s not to say that there is no logic in basing the metaphors on these verbs, it’s just that there is no necessity that the words be used in these metaphorical ways. We could not, for example, substitute synonyms for these verbs and have the resulting metaphors sound normal at all:

1. I am travelling to study now. (When you’re sitting in the chair where you intend to study)
2. I possess to study now.

Nor could you do the reverse:

1. I intend to Rome.
2. I am obligated a book.

With no requirement for "go" and "have" to bear the metaphorical meanings that English ascribes to them, most langauges (at least most languages I’ve studied) do not do this. To express intent and obligation they either use special words (their equivalents of "intend," "obligated," "must," etc.) or they may put the verb in a special mood. In any event, they don’t do what English does.

Imagine my surprise when I found a language that does.

Continue reading “I'm Going To Have To Figure This Out”

Would you expect to find languages using a form of the verb "to go" to express intention? . . . or a form of the verb "to have" to express obligation?

Well, English does. In fact, you just read a sentence (the title of this post) where forms of those words appear in those senses.

They’re somewhat strange senses. Consider:

1. I am going to Rome.
2. I am going to visit Rome.
3. I am going to study now.

In the first sentence the verb "go" has its normal, literal sense of moving from one place to another. In the last sentence it clearly has a metaphorical meaning. You may be sitting in the chair where you plan to study when you say it and may not be physically going anywhere at all. The middle sentence is actually using the same metaphorical sense as the last one, but you may not have noticed it since the topic under discussion was a visit, which would involve moving from one place to another.

Now consider:

1. I have a book
2. I have a headache.
3. I have to study now.

In the first sentence the verb "have" is in its original, literal meaning of possessing a physical object. In the last sentence it has a clearly metaphorical meaning that speaks of an obligation (to study now) as if it were a physical object that could be possessed. The middle sentence also involves a metaphorical sense since headaches are not physical objects that can be possessed, though this is somewhat masked since "a headache" is more obviously a noun phrase than "to study now" is (though, in actuality, "to study now" is a noun phrase since it is based on the infinitive "to study" and infinitives are verbal nouns).

Pretty weird, huh? There’s no necessary connection between the verb and the metaphor that is built out of it. That’s not to say that there is no logic in basing the metaphors on these verbs, it’s just that there is no necessity that the words be used in these metaphorical ways. We could not, for example, substitute synonyms for these verbs and have the resulting metaphors sound normal at all:

1. I am travelling to study now. (When you’re sitting in the chair where you intend to study)
2. I possess to study now.

Nor could you do the reverse:

1. I intend to Rome.
2. I am obligated a book.

With no requirement for "go" and "have" to bear the metaphorical meanings that English ascribes to them, most langauges (at least most languages I’ve studied) do not do this. To express intent and obligation they either use special words (their equivalents of "intend," "obligated," "must," etc.) or they may put the verb in a special mood. In any event, they don’t do what English does.

Imagine my surprise when I found a language that does.

Continue reading “I’m Going To Have To Figure This Out”