2

From what I know, in Simple Present, all verbs are followed by -s/es if the subject is a third-singular person. Such as makes, matches, buys, and studies.

I also know that if the verb is have, it becomes has if the subject is a third-singular person. And I'm wondering why it doesn't simply become haves, just like other verbs.

She has a book.

Why not: She haves a book.

So, my question is, what is the origin of the use of the verb has? I'm guessing euphony has something to do with it, but I need to support my guess.

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    It may have something to do with the older conjugations "I have", "you hast", "he hath", "they have".
    – DyingIsFun
    Commented Jun 22, 2016 at 3:40
  • 2
    Seems like the "-th" ending was supplanted by "-s" . Here's a relevant passage: "There is some evidence that verbs written with this [-th] ending in Early Modern English were pronounced as if they ended in -s, which was common in speech before becoming common in writing" (en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eth). This would mean "hath" shifts to "has".
    – DyingIsFun
    Commented Jun 22, 2016 at 3:45
  • 1
    @Silenus - you should write your comment up as an answer. :-)
    – Chappo Hasn't Forgotten
    Commented Jun 22, 2016 at 7:59
  • @Silenus, I agree with Chappo. You should write your comment up as an answer. Thank you.
    – Safira
    Commented Jun 26, 2016 at 4:02

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

As demanded in the comments, Silenius comment as answer:

Seems like the "-th" ending was supplanted by "-s" . Here's a relevant passage: "There is some evidence that verbs written with this [-th] ending in Early Modern English were pronounced as if they ended in -s, which was common in speech before becoming common in writing" [en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eth]. This would mean "hath" shifts to "has". – Silenus

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .