Can I get?

[lesblue]

When I am ordering something in a shop or pub, I ask:"Please can I have........?"
Youngsters today seem to ask: "Please can I get.........?"
Has this become the norm? If so, when did the change take place?

[rowanwitch]

I'm still saying ' please may I have ' .......

[Old_Geezer]

:-)

[grasscarp]

and have you notice gotten is starting to creep in to English this side of the pond?

[jno]

like 'forgotten' then?

It's American, I think, lesblue, so it's probably commonest among people who watch most American TV and movies, and that's probably young people.

In terms of the actual meaning of the words, it's no different from 'can I have...'

[rowanwitch]

only by the misbegotten

[Quizmonster]

I asked the same question some months ago. To see the answers I got click
http://www.theanswerb...s/Question844840.html

[factor-fiction]

@grasscarp: I thought Shakespeare used 'gotten'

[grasscarp]

Well I dont mind it sometimes, e.g. in ill gotten gains, but not as in "have you gotten over him yet?" Just me. I didnt realise Shakespeare used it. Thanks factor.

[Jemisa]

I agree about the 'gotten' word too. Most annoying.
Also they don't seem to know the difference between too and to ---- for instance
"I'll come along to." -----Ggrrrr!

Jem

[New Judge]

There are lots of things like this around and whenever I mention one of them I am usually told that language is dynamic and forever changing.

However, to the case in point, despite what jno suggests, there clearly is a very great difference between the two phrases and this was pointed out by one of the respondents to Quizmonster’s earlier question. “Can I have” implies that somebody will do the getting for you whilst “can I get” implies that you will get it for yourself. So this is not a question of language evolving it is simply incorrect. Fine provided everybody knows what you mean, not so fine when they don’t – and the idea of language is that everybody fluent in that language understand what is being said.

In short, it’s an unnecessary complication and just plain stupid.

[taddie]

As others have mentioned, 'gotten' came originally from this side of the Atlantic. As for 'can I get' I think it came from the awful 'Friends'.where they seemed to live in their local cofee shop. . The one that irks me is 'have you got' etc. to be answered by 'yes, I do'
Yes, I do got ? My old English teacher would have been tearing her hair out.

[coccinelle]

Taddie, that's usually the reply given when that person would have used in the same circumstance 'do you have?' instead of 'have you got?' so replies Yes, I do. It's automatic.

[whiskeryron]

I remember my first trip to California when I was 73 years old, in Disneyland I asked an icecream vendor '' May I have 2 vanilla cones please'' & I was asked '' Are you an actor'' ? when I replied that I was from the UK, she said '' How nice to meet someone so polite'' it made my day, so you see it does pay to be British & respectful.

[lesblue]

Thanks everyone for your input. I'm with New Judge on this one. "can I get........?" means (and has always meant, as far as I am concerned) "do you mind if I help myself to........?" Perhaps I'm getting old!!

[rowanwitch]

In which case lesblue there is a lot of it about..

[cc1]

Bill Bryson's book, Made in America tackles this as well as other phrases about which we get hot under the collar and the implication is that the American use is more akin to the original use and hence we are simply importing what we experted hundreds of years ago.
The thing I detest and cannot seem to remember first being used is "fill out" a form. Didn't we always "fill in" a form, which as information is being put into it makes a lot more sense!
And don't get me started on "could of" and "would of"!

[Quizmonster]

CC1, The Oxford English Dictionary generally tries to establish the earliest version of phrases in English. As regards fill in/out with forms etc, here are the two appropriate quotes...
"Mr Lanman forwarded to him a blank to be filled out with facts and dates." (1880)
"He had left the date blank for the plaintiff to fill jn." (1893)
It seems, therefore, that both are from the same era and equally valid, so nothing much to detest, really.
On the other hand, I totally agree with you that "could of" is a barbarism that ought to be fought against.