Is "Let me see" the same as "Let me have a look"

[gxnn]

I talked about this due to the recent vlog made by a reporter of China Daily, the official national English-language media of mainland China, in which she talked to a group of foreign journalists covering the ongoing Party Congress in Beijing and wanted to see their passes or licenses.

So what she meant was "Let me have a look", but what she actually said was "Let me see". As far as I know, the latter is used to think out aloud only.

Please advise.

 

[AlexBailey]

In the usage you mention, "Let me have a look* and "let me see" are interchangeable.

I cannot think of a circumstance where one would need to be used rather than the other, except that "let me see" could imply that only a glance is needed where "let me have a look" could imply a closer study.

 

[magic_rat]

They are sometimes (often) interchangeable but 'let me see' is often used metaphorically whereas let me look is more literal.

 

[jehoram]

They are sometimes (often) interchangeable but 'let me see' is often used metaphorically whereas let me look is more literal.

As in:

"Do you think you could handle that job?"
"Let me see... If I could get Aaron to move his appointment, maybe I could work it in."

If it was "Let me have a look..." the implication was that the speaker was consulting their calendar or appointment book, rather than just contemplating the proposal.

 

[pplwatching]

They are interchangeable, but I think context would make me choose one over the other. If she was commanding them to show their passes to prove that they had the right to be there, then "Let me see your passes" is correct, in my opinion. "Let me have a look" is less formal, as though it is implied that they have valid passes and she just needs to look at them to confirm. When I go to my doctor, she says "let me have a look at your throat". I tell a salesman that "I would like to take a look at the blue car". That said, English has a lot of variables.

 

[gxnn]

Is it like the case of "he don't know" and "he doesn't know"?
If you use the former in an English language test or exam, you will lose your mark, but in reality everyday life, pop songs and even some classic works, people prefer it to the latter. Is that a double standard?

 

[Whanmore]

Is it like the case of "he don't know" and "he doesn't know"?

Not so much. "He don't know" is improper. While it means the same thing, it would only ever be spoken.

"Let me see" and "let me have a look" are essentially the same phrase with different words.

 

[pplwatching]

Is it like the case of "he don't know" and "he doesn't know"?
If you use the former in an English language test or exam, you will lose your mark, but in reality everyday life, pop songs and even some classic works, people prefer it to the latter. Is that a double standard?

This goes beyond grammar and into culture, setting a scene or mood, and style. For a very long time, only people of some means could afford the education to learn perfect grammar and diction. Less fortunate people without access to that education, grew up in bad neighborhoods, or who worked from young ages would learn a kind of 'street grammar', with bad verb conjugation and other identifiable traits. Because everyone around them spoke that way, they all understood each other and no one corrected anyone else. You could, and still can infer how rich or poor someone was by their use of correct or street grammar. In some cases, the kinds of errors they make can even tell you what city they live in.

In literature and lyrics, writers use this to enrich their stories and communicate with their audience. If an author wants to create a certain setting, such as a story taking place in a poor neighborhood, they will often have the grammar in their character's dialog have common, repeating errors that people associate with race or economic class. You will find stories about people crossing between cultures or conflicts, for example a rich person correcting the grammar of a poor person and know which is which by their grammar and diction.

In music, for example, if you want to sing about being poor and want your audience to think about being poor and the hardships that go with it, or just that you're 'just like them' and not some rich guy trying to make money from their culture, you employ these cultural grammar 'errors' to build that mood or association. When people appropriate culture in this way, their audience will pick up on other cues too.

 

[curioustxn]

I talked about this due to the recent vlog made by a reporter of China Daily, the official national English-language media of mainland China, in which she talked to a group of foreign journalists covering the ongoing Party Congress in Beijing and wanted to see their passes or licenses.

So what she meant was "Let me have a look", but what she actually said was "Let me see". As far as I know, the latter is used to think out aloud only.

Please advise.

It depends on the context of how it is used in the conversation. "Let me have a look", means I want to see something. "Let me see" can mean I want to see something, or depending on the context, it can mean, I am thinking about it. If used in the context of wanting to see someone's pass/license, the term "Let me see" would be correct.

It can also depend on who is saying it, and where they learned English. *Colloquialism*

I once met a man from Japan who spoke perfect Oxford English. I understood him perfectly; however, because I spoke a Texas dialect, he couldn't understand anything I said; yet, we were speaking the same language. While it is correct to say *Let me see your license*, in some regions/area, you might find some one who would say *Let me have a look at your license*.

A lot of words and phrases in the English language have double meanings, depending on the context and dialect in which it is used.

Confusing, huh?

 

[jehoram]

This goes beyond grammar and into culture, setting a scene or mood, and style. For a very long time, only people of some means could afford the education to learn perfect grammar and diction. Less fortunate people without access to that education, grew up in bad neighborhoods, or who worked from young ages would learn a kind of 'street grammar', with bad verb conjugation and other identifiable traits. Because everyone around them spoke that way, they all understood each other and no one corrected anyone else. You could, and still can infer how rich or poor someone was by their use of correct or street grammar. In some cases, the kinds of errors they make can even tell you what city they live in.

I've read a few lexicographers who might take issue with the dichotomy of "correct/bad" grammar or vocabulary. While they concede that there is a "standard" grammar or vocabulary, what some might call "bad" grammar or vocabulary is just as serviceable as the "good" kind. If everybody around you spoke your variety of English and understood each other, than it's clearly as "good" as any other. One could even turn the argument on its head and say that upper-class English is "bad" if nobody but other upper-class English people could understand it.

 

[pplwatching]

I'm a descriptivist, but can't deny the value of prescriptivism in the age of global communication.

 

[Athalia]

I once met a man from Japan who spoke perfect Oxford English. I understood him perfectly; however, because I spoke a Texas dialect, he couldn't understand anything I said; yet, we were speaking the same language.

I had the same experience the first time I visited Dublin. With my American accent (my studies in England still hadn't rubbed off), I tried to converse with some Irish schoolchildren and they couldn't understand a word I said. I had to (badly) mimic an Irish brogue before I could make myself plain. And all of us were using a grammatically correct version of English.

 

[Athalia]

Is it like the case of "he don't know" and "he doesn't know"?
If you use the former in an English language test or exam, you will lose your mark, but in reality everyday life, pop songs and even some classic works, people prefer it to the latter. Is that a double standard?

Yes, there is. When you encounter it in a literary work or a song, it's the voice of the narrator, using the narrator's figures of speech. The use of "He don't" marks the narrator as from a lower class in, curiously, both England and the US. If the writer is assuming the persona of a person from that class, "he don't" would not only be acceptable but mandatory.

As writers, we have the ability to use whatever persona drives the plot... that of a character, or of a person observing the action from a different perspective. I remember reading something from Mark Twain concerning the characters in Huckleberry Finn. That book was written in the style of a relatively unlettered young man, and it caused some outrage from people who thought that writers should use proper English. Not only that, but Twain used different dialects for different characters. He remarked on this in a prologue, explaining that without this remark, the readers would think that the characters were all trying to talk alike and not succeeding.