Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Have y Do
Have y Do
UNSJ – FFHHA
Ambos funcionan como verbo y como auxiliar. Vamos a ver cada uno por separado.
DO
Tiene varias formas: do/does(3er p) (presente), did (pasado), done (3ra columna-participio),
doing (haciendo).
Como verbo significa “hacer una acción o actividad”. Asimismo se utiliza en una gran
variedad de frases y expresiones, muchas de ellas de uso coloquial.
Como auxiliar carece de significado; su función es indicar tiempo presente o pasado.
Ejemplos:
● (texto sobre la colonización del continente americano) What did people in Spain get
out of all that death and brutality visited on the Indians of the Americas? (Zinn, H.
(2005) A People’s History of the United States. p. 17. Harper Perennial Modern Classics)
En este ejemplo vemos una interrogación donde aparece did antepuesto a la persona a
quien se refiere la oración (el sujeto). El verbo es “get”, que en este contexto (y seguido de
out of) significa “sacar provecho de algo”. Did solamente indica que lo enunciado se refiere
al tiempo pasado. Esto es así porque tanto en la negación como en la interrogación el verbo
carece de marcas que indican a qué tiempo se refiere.
I GO WENT GONE
YOU GO WENT GONE
HE SHE GOES WENT GONE
WE GO WENT GONE
YOU GO WENT GONE
THEY GO WENT GONE
Maestría Historia – Maestría Lingüística – Doctorado en Filosofía
UNSJ – FFHHA
Pasado
I went to school
I didn’t (DID NOT) go school
Did you go to school?
Glosario:
*master: en este contexto, significa “amo”
Owe: adeudar
En este caso, vemos también a do funcionando como auxiliar. En las tres interrogaciones, el
verbo es “owe”, que significa “adeudar”. Al ser una cita textual, se conservan do/does
aunque el lector debe referirse a los hechos ya pasados y contextualizados. El uso do y
does no es aleatorio, reservándose does solamente para la tercera persona singular.
“... with the rise of the social sciences, interest in the linguistic relativity principle has
revived. [...] If speakers of different languages do not understand one another, it is not
because their languages cannot be mutually translated into one another -which they
obviously can, to a certain extent. It is because they don’t share the same way of
viewing and interpreting events; they don’t agree on the meaning and the value of the
concepts underlying the words. In short, they don’t cut up reality or categorize
experience in the same manner. Understanding across languages does not depend on
Maestría Historia – Maestría Lingüística – Doctorado en Filosofía
UNSJ – FFHHA
structural equivalences but on common conceptual systems, born from the larger
context of our experience. (Kramsch, C. (1998) Language and Culture, p. 13, OUP)
HAVE
Sus formas son: have/has (presente), had (pasado), had (3ra columna), having.
Como verbo, significa “tener”, “poseer”, “beber”, “comer”, etc.
“...language has its ties to life through the senses.” (Richards J. and Rodgers T (2008)
Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, p. 117, CUP)
“Queen Elizabeth II has a strong affection for the Commonwealth, and undertakes her
duties towards its members with charm and dignity. Her and her family’s
peregrinations have a deeper significance: they provide a sense of historic continuity for
the former subjects of the empire and their descendants.” (James, L. (1998) The Rise and
Fall of the British Empire, p. 625, Abacus)
Subjects: súbditos…integrantes
Una frase común es have to seguida de otro verbo en infinitivo; el significado es “tener
que…”. Por ejemplo, “I have to finish my essay” se puede entender como “Tengo que
terminar mi ensayo”. Otro ejemplo:
“... a few days after the invasion [recaptura de las islas Malvinas por parte de tropas
argentinas], a body of skinheads gathered outside a recruiting office in the Midlands and
demanded rifles and passage to the Falklands. They were furious when told they had to
be trained, and gave vent to their frustration by breaking the windows of the office.”
(James, L., op. cit, p. 628)
➢ ¿Cuál ha sido el interés de los lingüistas en los hablantes nativos de una lengua?
➢ ¿Qué dice el texto acerca de los hablantes nativos?
“So Britain embarked on its final imperial war [ se refiere a Malvinas] to redeem its honour
and to recapture what had always been seen as one of the least of its colonies. It was ironic
that many of the warships which steamed to the South Atlantic had been earmarked for the
scrapyard by defence cuts proposed the year before by the Defence Secretary, John Nott.
[...] First-hand footage of the fighting was impossible to transmit directly, and so viewers
had to suffer a succession of armchair admirals and generals who offered their explanations
of what was happening together with unsolicited advice.” (James, L., op. cit, p. 627)
➢ Según el texto, cuál era la importancia de las Malvinas para Gran Bretaña?
➢ Que dice el texto acerca de los navíos de guerra enviados al Atlántico Sur?
(ayúdense con un diccionario)
➢ ¿En qué se basaba la cobertura periodística del desarrollo de la guerra? Según el
texto, ¿cómo recibían los televidentes esta cobertura?