Modal "would"

Share on Facebook

Buzel

#257672 Sun, 20 Aug 06 08:09 PM

Suppose we have the following sentence

"I think that a direct object would be the best choise in this case".

Can i transfer it into the past with "would" remaining its modal meaning, not the past of "will".

I mean, if i write " I thought that direct object would be the best choise in this case", could "would" be taken as both an auxiliary and a modal verb?

Buzel

Joined on Sat, Aug 12 2006

Moscow

New Member (42)

Please, correct my writing in the entire post, not only in the part where i'm asking a question.

Auxiliaries, Direct objects, Modal verbs, Modals, Verbs

CalifJim

#257684 Sun, 20 Aug 06 08:34 PM

My understanding is that would is always a modal verb and always an auxiliary verb, so I'm not sure I understand the question. would is the backshifted form both of will and of would, if that's what you mean.

I think that this will be the best choice.
I thought that this would be the best choice.

I think that this would be the best choice.
I thought that this would be the best choice.

Given only the second sentence
I thought that this would be the best choice.

it's a matter of guesswork and intuition to determine which of the two "I think" sentences it comes from.
(Once the salt is out of the shaker, it's hard to get it back in through the little holes in the top!)

CJ

CalifJim

Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004

California

Veteran Member (16,970)

"There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche

Auxiliaries, Modal verbs, Modals, Verbs

Buzel

#257692 Sun, 20 Aug 06 09:22 PM

Thank you. That's exactly what my question concerned.

Buzel

Modals

Aperisic

#257700 Sun, 20 Aug 06 10:11 PM

CalifJim wrote:
My understanding is that would is always a modal verb and always an auxiliary verb, so I'm not sure I understand the question. would is the backshifted form both of will and of would, if that's what you mean.

I think that this will be the best choice.
I thought that this would be the best choice.

I think that this would be the best choice.
I thought that this would be the best choice.

Given only the second sentence
I thought that this would be the best choice.

it's a matter of guesswork and intuition to determine which of the two "I think" sentences it comes from.

That is the problem, so if a writer wants to be clean and precise he can use: should, could, would've been, and not less: is(am,are), will

Here is the trick in I think that this will be the best choice.

If the situation is still such and you still think the same

I thought that this is the best choice.

[you can say even: I thought that this will be the best choice for tomorrow.]

If you, at the moment of writing, know that it is not the case

I thought that this would've been the best choice.

My point is that

that this will be the best choice. has the function of an object and you do not have to match tenses within objects.

So, strictly!!!

I thought that this would be the best choice.

is not the past of the

I think that this will be the best choice.

as much

I thought that the ball was white.

is not the past of the

I think that the ball is white.

1) I thought that the ball is white. (but it is not a white ball at all, not now, not in the past)

2) I thought that the ball was white. (the ball was not white in the past)

Because of that, again strictly!!!, in

I thought that this would be the best choice.

would is, if a writer was careful, just would - not the past of will

However, yes, there are certain situations where would is ambiguous, not, though, where a writer knew what he was doing.

Aperisic

Joined on Fri, Jul 21 2006

Full Member (409)

Auxiliaries, Modal verbs, Modals, Tenses, Verbs

Aperisic

#257702 Sun, 20 Aug 06 10:18 PM

You asked for it

That's exactly what my question concerns.

It still does Smile [:)]

Aperisic

Modals

MrPedantic

#257724 Mon, 21 Aug 06 12:51 AM

I'm not sure the ambiguity is significant; I'm inclined to think there's no need to look for alternatives.

The original sentence serves a particular purpose: giving an opinion which might affect a present situation, e.g.

1. I think that this will be the best choice. ] "confident" opinion.

2. I think that this would be the best choice.] slightly more "tentative" or "deferential" opinion.

Once the event is in the past, however, the sentence has a different purpose: reporting "what was thought", i.e.

3. I thought that this would be the best choice.

In fact, #3 could also report these sentences:

4. This will be the best choice. ] very confident.

5. This would be the best choice. ] more tentative.

MrP

MrPedantic

Joined on Wed, Oct 13 2004

Veteran Member (12,053)

...opella forensis / adducit febris...

Modals

Aperisic

#257845 Mon, 21 Aug 06 11:32 AM

MrPedantic wrote:
I'm not sure the ambiguity is significant; I'm inclined to think there's no need to look for alternatives.

The original sentence serves a particular purpose: giving an opinion which might affect a present situation, e.g.

1. I think that this will be the best choice. ] "confident" opinion.

2. I think that this would be the best choice.] slightly more "tentative" or "deferential" opinion.

Once the event is in the past, however, the sentence has a different purpose: reporting "what was thought", i.e.

3. I thought that this would be the best choice.

In fact, #3 could also report these sentences:

4. This will be the best choice. ] very confident.

5. This would be the best choice. ] more tentative.

MrP

Yes, that is an example of what I said as well. Once you move this type of sentence to the past, your perspective change, you cannot just shift will to would and say the origin of this past sentence is this one that was in the present. No way. When you write about the past you have more information than when you write about the present time.

Not only that. When you have an object in form of the sentence in the present tense, there in no rule that says that you have to shift this object sentence to the past tense when you shift the whole sentence to the past. I gave these extreme examples somewhere else as well:

My friend who died 10 years ago has his grave here. (the grave is still here)

My friend who died 10 years ago had his grave here. (the grave was removed)

Most of the errors about the concordance, agreement of temps in relative clauses originate in the rules of the reporting speech and time clause. Teachers tend to force kids to think about this even when it is totally inappropriate. The kids in return are almost scared to think about this, but the rules are really very simple.