Sapporo Language School AGREATDREAM - Eikaiwa

Notice: This school will be closed from October 27th (Thu) to November 10th (Thu) for remodeling.
Please email us if you have any question or telephone us after November 11th (Fri). Thank you.

Using “Get to” and “Got to”

Part 1: “How do you get to ___________?”

Complete the sentences with the appropriate place. Then, answer the question with full sentences using “get to.”

Example

Question: How do you get to school?

Answer: I get to school by bus.

1. How do you get to your best friend’s house?

2. How do you get to the nearest train station?

3. How do you get to the supermarket?

4. How do you get to the park?

Part 2: “Got to” (Past Tense)

Change the sentences to the past tense using “got to.” Answer the questions in full sentences.

Example

Question: How did you get to school yesterday?

Answer: I got to school by walking.

1. How did you get to your friend’s house last weekend?

2. How did you get to work on Monday?

3. How did you get to the airport last summer?

Part 3: Make Your Own Questions

Write 3 questions using “How do you get to…?” Ask about places you frequently go to. Then answer them.

1. How do you get to ___________?

2. How do you get to _____________?

3. How do you get to ___________?

Part 4: Writing Practice

Write a short paragraph (4-5 sentences) about a trip you took recently. Use “got to” to describe how you reached different places.

Higher Level Study

Are “get to” and “got to” idioms?

Yes, “get to” and “got to” are considered idiomatic expressions in English because their meanings often go beyond the literal interpretation of the words. Idioms are phrases where the meaning isn’t directly derived from the individual words and both “get to” and “got to” fit this description in specific contexts. Here’s a quick breakdown:

“Get to” as an Idiom

  • Idiomatic Uses:
    1. Opportunity or privilege: “I get to work with a great team.” (Implies a positive opportunity, not just arriving at work.)
    2. Affect or annoy: “The heat is really getting to me.” (Means it’s bothering or overwhelming, not literally reaching.)
    3. Start doing something: “Let’s get to cleaning the house.” (Implies beginning a task, not arriving at it.)
  • Why it’s idiomatic: The phrase’s meaning depends on context and isn’t just about “getting” somewhere or something. For example, “getting to me” doesn’t mean physically reaching “me” but rather emotionally or mentally affecting.

“Got to” as an Idiom

  • Idiomatic Uses:
    1. Obligation or necessity: “I’ve got to go to the store.” (Means “I must” or “I have to,” not literally possessing “to go.”)
    2. Past opportunity: “I got to see the concert last night.” (Implies having had the chance, similar to “get to” but in past tense.)
  • Why it’s idiomatic: Especially in the sense of “have to” (pronounced as “gotta” in casual speech), “got to” doesn’t literally mean possessing something. It’s a colloquial way to express obligation or an experience, which makes it idiomatic.

Literal vs. Idiomatic

Not every use of “get to” or “got to” is idiomatic, but when they convey these non-literal meanings, they qualify as idioms.

Both phrases can be used literally (e.g., “I got to the station” means physically arriving), but their idiomatic meanings (obligation, opportunity, annoyance, etc.) are more common in everyday speech and depend heavily on context.

The idioms “get to” and “got to” with their meanings and examples:

Get to

  1. Meaning: To have the opportunity or chance to do something enjoyable or desirable.
    • Example: I finally get to meet my favorite author at the book signing tomorrow!
  2. Meaning: To arrive at or reach a place.
    • Example: We got to the airport just in time for our flight.
  3. Meaning: To begin doing something or start focusing on a task.
    • Example: Let’s get to work on this project before the deadline sneaks up.
  4. Meaning: To affect or annoy someone (informal, often in the sense of something bothering you).
    • Example: The constant noise is really getting to me today.

Got to

  1. Meaning: Informal way of saying “have to” or “must” (indicating necessity or obligation).
    • Example: I’ve got to finish this report by tonight or my boss will be upset.
    • Note: Often pronounced as “gotta” in casual speech.
  2. Meaning: To have the opportunity or privilege to do something (similar to “get to” but in past tense or informal contexts).
    • Example: I got to try skydiving last weekend and it was amazing!

Key Notes:

  • “Get to” is often about opportunity, arrival, starting something or being bothered.
  • “Got to” is typically about obligation (“have to”) or reflecting on an opportunity in a casual tone.
  • Context matters, as both can overlap in meaning depending on the sentence.

“Got to” vs “Have to”

‘Got to’ implies being able to do something you wanted to; ‘have to’ implies being forced to do something you didn’t. 

– marcellothearcane, Commented Sep. 24, 2019 at 4:35

The have to meaning, especially when got is not preceded by have, is typically used in spoken speech in very informal contexts (if it appears in writing, it is normally just a transcription of something spoken). In such spoken contexts, this got to is typically pronounced as gotta and in writing it is often transcribed as such (see e.g. here). Thus, in spoken language, the two senses of got to are usually pronounced differently and so there is normally no confusion.

If the pronunciation is atypical, or if the transcription does not use the ‘pronunciation spelling’ gotta, then there are indeed sentences like I got to spend time with my wife which, when considered in isolation, are ambiguous.

But again, in practice, the context normally makes it quite clear which meaning is meant.

One clear difference is that in the have to meaning, got to can be used in the present tense, whereas in the other meaning, it is understood to be in the past tense.

CGEL says that gotta is a morphological compound (p. 1617), whereby the initial to of an infinitival catenative complement may, in informal speech, be morphologically incorporated into the preceding head word.

(There are six other compounds like that: going + to → gonna, have + to → hafta, ought + to → oughta, supposed + to → supposta, used + to → usta, want + to → wanna.)

CGEL further says this about these seven compounds:

This phenomenon is to be distinguished from the regular phonological reduction of to (infinitival marker or preposition) to the weak form /tə/, as in:

[10] a. I hope to see her. /hoʊp tə/ b. They drove to Paris. /droʊv tə/

The most significant difference is that the forms [gotta etc.] can be stranded, whereas the reduction to a weak form illustrated in [10] does not take place in this kind of context (cf. [5i] above). Compare, then:

[11] i a. He doesn’t want me to tell her but I’m gonna ___.
         b. I asked them to help but they don’t wanna ___.
       ii a. I’m not sure I’ll see her, but I hope to ___. [/hoʊp tu:/, /not */hoʊp tə/]
          b. That’s not the place they drove to ___. [/droʊv tu:/, not */droʊv tə/]

In this respect the case is similar to that of negative forms like can’t or isn’t (§5.5) and we again regard it therefore as a matter of morphology, not mere phonological reduction. But it is much less systematic than the negative case, applying to just seven words which do not in other respects belong together as a class; it thus falls within the sphere of lexical morphology, not inflection.

This is to say that the forms [gonna, etc.] are morphological compounds. And because the infinitival marker has been incorporated into the compound the catenative complement is a bare infinitival, not a to-infinitival. For the same reason they can only enter into the simple catenative construction, not the complex one. The ordinary verb want can enter into either: They want to get a new car (simple) or They want me to get a new car (complex). There is naturally no compounded counterpart of the latter example because want and to are not adjacent. But even when the object NP is fronted so that the to does immediately follow want, the compound is still excluded. Compare, then:

[12]  i a. Who do you want to invite ___?    b. Who do you wanna invite ___?
        ii a. Who do you want ___ to win?                 b. *Who do you wanna ___ win?

In [i a] who is object of invite, whereas in [ii a] it is object of want. Example [i a] thus belongs to the simple catenative construction (like I want to invite Kim) and hence allows incorporation of to, as in [i b]; [ii a] belongs to the complex construction (like I want Kim to win) and hence has no counterpart with wanna, for the compound verb licenses only a single complement, a subjectless bare infinitival.

linguisticturn, Sep. 24, 2019 at 8:37