I Have ........

[ghanashyam]

Have heard such a thing :

I have had a pen at that time in my pocket.

You will not find such a thing in any grammar book but you will find it some novels. The meaning that is conveyed is that the person is giving extra weight to his statement.

[Eudora13]

I think this wouldn't be grammatically wrong, if the case wasn't as specific as having a pen in the pocket.

For instance,

"I have had my share of bad luck in the past."

"I have had a day off during Christmas when I worked there."

Even the sentence you mentioned doesn't sound wrong if the context is understood.

[LauraM]

Have heard such a thing :

I have had a pen at that time in my pocket.

You will not find such a thing in any grammar book but you will find it some novels. The meaning that is conveyed is that the person is giving extra weight to his statement.

"Have had" is the perfect tense of the verb "have." 

The meaning conveyed with "have had" is something that once happened continually no longer happens.  In other words, "have had" implies an ongoing situation from the past. 

I'm not sure I have seen or heard a sentence like that.  If you add "at that time" it's a specific time period rather than an ongoing situation, so that seems to me to be an incorrect usage of the perfect tense. 

It seems to me that there is already enough emphasis in just saying "I had a pen at that time in my pocket."

[sayitwell]

"Have had" is the perfect tense of the verb "have." 

The meaning conveyed with "have had" is something that once happened continually no longer happens.  In other words, "have had" implies an ongoing situation from the past. 

I'm not sure I have seen or heard a sentence like that.  If you add "at that time" it's a specific time period rather than an ongoing situation, so that seems to me to be an incorrect usage of the perfect tense. 

It seems to me that there is already enough emphasis in just saying "I had a pen at that time in my pocket."

that's exactly how i think.  i would state "i had a pen at the time in my pocket" as well.  i don't see why anyone would include the "have".  it is totally unnecessary.  i think most people will agree with us.

[ghanashyam]

that's exactly how i think.  i would state "i had a pen at the time in my pocket" as well.  i don't see why anyone would include the "have".  it is totally unnecessary.  i think most people will agree with us.

So here is a situation. You are in the witness box in the court and the lawyer is cross examining you.

Lawyer: Are you sure Mr. Siyitwell that you had a pen in your pocket at the time of murder and you noted down the number of the car in which the murderer escaped? Are you sure?"

Siyitwell: Yes, I had .  I always have a pen in my pocket And I have had the pen in my pocket at the time of murder."

And that way the lawyer would stop asking you any further questions about pen.

English uses the present perfect to express a period of time that started in the past and continues in the present (e.g. I have had this watch for 10 years).

http://esl.fis.edu/learners/advice/gram.htm

[rgaz83]

So here is a situation. You are in the witness box in the court and the lawyer is cross examining you.

Lawyer: Are you sure Mr. Siyitwell that you had a pen in your pocket at the time of murder and you noted down the number of the car in which the murderer escaped? Are you sure?"

Siyitwell: Yes, I had .  I always have a pen in my pocket And I have had the pen in my pocket at the time of murder."

And that way the lawyer would stop asking you any further questions about pen.

English uses the present perfect to express a period of time that started in the past and continues in the present (e.g. I have had this watch for 10 years).

http://esl.fis.edu/learners/advice/gram.htm

That doesn't sound correct at all. While I'll agree that "have had" is perfectly acceptable English, I think it is wrong at this time. Instead of:

Siyitwell: Yes, I had .  I always have a pen in my pocket And I have had the pen in my pocket at the time of murder."

I think it would be better if the response was "Yes, I did. I always have a pen in my pocket, and I definitely had the pen in my pocket at the time of the murder." You could also say "Yes, I had one. I always have a pen in my pocket; I certainly had the pen in my pocket at the time of the murder."

The sentence as written sort of implies that there were multiple murders and you had the pen in your pocket for ONE of them, but not the others. At least, that's the vibe I'm getting as a native English speaker.

[sayitwell]

ghanashyam,

in your example of "I have had this watch for 10 years" i certainly can see why you word it the way that you did.  i would probably say "i've had this watch for 10 years".  i wouldn't say "i have had...".  it just does not sound right and i've never heard anyone say it that way.  everyone correctly abbreviates "i have had" to "i've" because it is the proper way to say it.

[ghanashyam]

English is not my mother tongue but when I was young I was a quite a reader of Perry Mason novels. Yes, it is true you do not see this " have had " thing now a days, probably because people have changed the usage of grammar a lot. Anyway, thanks a lot for this discussion.

[pandandesign]

"I have had" would mean that you have something before but now you no long have it again. However, it is not similar to "I used to have." It depends on how it sounds in a sentence, which is a perfect tense of 'Have'.

[justusforus]

Now that whole discussion made me think.  I have had...in terms of the time component is something I never really thought about.  The cross examination sort of threw me.  Guess if I would have been the attorney I would have followed up to clarify the testimony and not assume the witness understood "the perfect tense".  An interesting thread to say the least.  I have had my "stop and think" moments here, but this was truly a specific one to remember.

[Daedalus]

"I have had" would mean that you have something before but now you no long have it again.

Not necessarily though. This sentence for example: "I have an excellent appetite, and I've had it for as long as I can remember." It doesn't mean you no longer have it.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that had comes from the verb to have, and so it seems the meaning is the same. But it's just the way the past perfect tense is made.

Instead of have had, we can look at another example: "I have seen many stars at night." You can change that to "I saw many stars at night," which nearly means the same thing, but is slightly different. Neither sentence is wrong. To me, the first seems to imply more experience, while the latter feels closer, almost only meaning 'last night', not 'night' in general.