To be, to have and to get

Once upon a time, there were two little verbs, to be and to have. To be and to have were great friends because they had one big thing in common. They both described things. To be described things on the inside, their essence. When to be did this, he teamed up with one of his adjective friends.
To have also described things, but on the outside. And when he did this he met one of his noun friends. So for example, when we describe a table we say that it is wooden, it is big, it is hard, it is expensive. We also say it has four legs, it has a shiny surface and it has a drawer. To be and to have are in our language to enable us to describe (amongst other things).
But there was a problem. They found that things, and particularly people, changed. Something which is described now may not be the same tomorrow. There is a change. When I was a boy I was small but now I’m tall. This morning I was full but now I’m hungry. I was young but now I’m old.
To be and to have were sitting together pondering this problem of change when a new verb arrived, to get. To get was a funny looking girl. She wasn’t as solid-looking as to be and she wasn’t holding all those bags like to have. When you looked at to get, she looked like a shimmering line just begging for something to attach itself to each end, like a bridge suspended in mid-air.
To get provided a path towards change. For a small boy to get bigger. For a poor man to get richer. For a cold day to get warmer and for a young girl to get older.
To get also provided a pathway of change for have. When you don’t have a car, you get a car and then you have a car. When you don’t have money you get money and then you have money. You don’t have a job you get a job and then you have a job.
So to be and to have describe things and to get allows that description to change.
And they all of course lived happily ever after.

Blog tags: