has/is having

You are correct.

John has a cramp.

John has a cold.

John has a broken leg.

John has a headache.

John has diabetes (He is diabetic)

These above are mainly US English usage. A UK or British Commonwealth speaker may well say "John has got a cramp" etc.

--- BUT ---

John is having a heart attack (Call a doctor!)

John is having an epileptic fit (Loosen his clothing!)

John is having surgery on his nose (soon)

John is having surgery on his nose next week

John is having surgery on his nose today

Mary is having a baby (She is pregnant)

Mary is having a baby right now. (She is in labour)

Mary has a baby (The child has been born)

Thanks.

contrex, no offense intended, but in the USA "labour" is usually spelled "labor". I am kinda following along to learn.

In the real world, it's always spelled "labour"!

margo
Are you telling me the USA is an imaginary world

TTH, no offence taken (note correct spelling), but why did you bother telling me that? Didn't you realise that UK and British Commonwealth spelling of words like labour, colour, humour, odour, offence, licence (noun) are just as "correct" as your US spellings? Since we invented the language, I think we have the prior claim.

Being serious now, people learning English as a foreign language are going to find that there are many spelling grammar and usage differences between US and UK English.

I realize there is a difference. I only added that post to show how labor is spelled in the USA.

You can have prior claim to the language. I like the way words are spelled in the UK, like theatre instead of theater. I don't know why the USA had to make the spelling different.

Edit: I am glad you didn't take offense or offence btw

Doesn't it all go back to Webster's Dictionary in the 19th century?



I could see that you were making a helpful and interesting point.

Oddly enough, although in general Australia still seems to follow UK spelling, the name of the Australian Labor Party is thus spelt (or spelled!). It was founded with the word spelt "Labour" in 1908 but changed to "Labor" in 1912.

It is said that of the numerous Labour parties throughout the world, only Australia's, the USA's and South Korea's are known as Labor parties, without the u.

Even in Georgia, Sweden and Mauritius, there's a u in the respective countries' Labour parties.

There seem to be three competing reasons alleged for the Ozzie's change to "Labor", which are as follows:

1. there was influence by the American labor movement leading to the spelling change in 1912 (I'd personally like to know what kind of influence and why that would induce a change in spelling, but that's all the information I could find on the ALP website);

2. Australia's lefties wanted to associate themselves more closely with the relatively more progressive USA rather than the more conservative English homeland back in the early days of the party, and the spelling of its name was a means to do this apparently; (This reason is also given in Wikipedia)

3. Australian politician and member of the Labor caucus (although not a member of the Labor party as such because it didn't exist in his home state of Tasmania at the time, interestingly enough), King O'Malley, was an advocate for spelling reform and persuaded the party that Labor was a more "modern" spelling than Labour and the u got dropped.

Since the discussion is on spelling, could somebody let me know why 40 is 'forty' and not 'fourty'? Is there any reason for the disappearance of the 'u'?

Many thanks.

You should try to get access to an etymological dictionary if you are curious about such things!

Briefly, they came from different Old Saxon words, then shared the same beginning "fou", then moved apart again later.

ME. is Middle English, the language of England between about
1100 and 1500 A.D.

AS. is Anglo-Saxon, the language of the Saxon tribes that invaded
England in the 5th and 6th centuries - from about 600 A.D.

OS. is Old Saxon, the language of the original Saxon tribes of
northwest Germany between the Rhine and the Elbe rivers.

forty: ME. forti, fourti, fowerti, from AS. feowertig;
akin to OS. fiwartig, fiartig

four: ME. four, fower, feower, from AS. feower;
akin to OS. fiwar

So four and forty were different words starting a long time ago but
were spelled with the same beginning in Old Saxon and Anglo-Saxon
and part of Middle English. Somewhere along the way during the
Middle English era the simpler spelling of forty took hold and has continued ever since.

I have no idea if it does.

When I saw your post #2759026 my first reaction was WOW. You went into detail to answer the question. I know that I have gotten lazy as far as English spelling and grammar are concerned. There are just so many rules and exceptions to the English language that I figure as long as someone knows what I am talking about that is what matters.

If I write a letter to a government agency or a business, then I do make sure my spelling and grammar are correct. I have seen letters from both the government and large companies that have spelling mistakes. When the letter is a form letter, I take the time to write back and let them know about their mistake so they can fix it in their computer.

btw thanks for the explanation on the word "labor/labour".

I don't know that "imaginary" is the word I'd use to describe the US of A.

It's certainly not my world, and if you hear me say "only in America" - that's probably not a compliment.

The Labor Party in Oz is a worry - you have to presume they are all spelling-challenged - despite Contrex's quite detailed and plausible explanation!

contres, I would have said that "John has GOT a cramp" (emphasis added), was a US usage, not a UK usage. Since you seem to think it's UK not US, it's apparently universal, because we certainly use it.

I'm not saying you don't. I've noticed a lot of Americans say "I have flu" or "I have diabetes" where a Brit would say "I have got flu" or "I have got diabetes" in that situation.