ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

CalifJim — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 05:36:56 GMT

the difference between could and to be able to is now lessen in contemporary English (or Informal English),

No. It has nothing to do with contemporary English or informal English.

There are certain meanings that can be conveyed by could, and there are certain meanings that can be conveyed by was/were able to. Very many of these meanings can be conveyed by either one or the other, and it doesn't make much difference which you use, but there are some cases where it makes a difference, and then you have to choose one or the other.

CJ

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

CalifJim — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 05:29:41 GMT

When we say "In the relevant reading" or "On the relevant reading", we mean, "Using the meaning of the word(s) that we have been discussing, and not a different meaning".

In this thread, when we say "On the relevant reading of could", we mean, "Using the 'success' meaning of could", because that's the meaning of could we have been discussing here.

CJ

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Belly — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:34:01 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
Goodman,

In the relevant reading, where could is used in the affirmative in an attempt to convey the meaning succeeded, which is what Belly (and Michael Swan) were talking about, could cannot be used.

We ran; therefore, we [*could catch / were able to catch / succeeded in catching / caught] the bus.
____________

Compare the following two examples, with different meanings:

-- Were you able to notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, fortunately, I was able to.
(Meaning: Did you succeed in notifying the police ...? Yes, I succeeded.)
-----------------------------
-- Could you notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, I could.
(Meaning: Would you be able (hypothetically) to notify the police ...? Yes, I would.)
("Coded" meaning: Please notify the police .... Yes, I will.)
(Not the same meaning as above. could cannot be used to convey the "success" meaning above.)
____________

Certainly, could can be used in other readings, such as would be able to. This alternate reading is typical in a so that clause of purpose, examples of which you have quoted above.

CJ

Now, I start to get a picture. So if we put sat and use an adverbial clause, it is equal to two gerunds clause, it's the grammar of English which I cannot, say,have any protest.

Another idea I can withdraw from is, the difference between could and to be able to is now lessen in contemporary English (or Informal English), is not it? And what is relevant reading, CJ?

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Anonymous — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:38:01 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
Goodman,

In the relevant reading, where could is used in the affirmative in an attempt to convey the meaning succeeded, which is what Belly (and Michael Swan) were talking about, could cannot be used.

We ran; therefore, we [*could catch / were able to catch / succeeded in catching / caught] the bus.
____________

Compare the following two examples, with different meanings:

-- Were you able to notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, fortunately, I was able to.
(Meaning: Did you succeed in notifying the police ...? Yes, I succeeded.)
-----------------------------
-- Could you notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, I could.
(Meaning: Would you be able (hypothetically) to notify the police ...? Yes, I would.)
("Coded" meaning: Please notify the police .... Yes, I will.)
(Not the same meaning as above. could cannot be used to convey the "success" meaning above.)
____________

Certainly, could can be used in other readings, such as would be able to. This alternate reading is typical in a so that clause of purpose, examples of which you have quoted above.

CJ

Thanks for the reply CJ,

Yes I agree your example did validate the point but still that rule is somewhat unclear in certain contexts, such as the one I posted with my last thread. I am not arguing the point, and I agree in some contexts, Swan's explanation is true. What drove me crazy is that by comparing the structures in the examples found on the NET, I saw the same structure used. So I draw the same parallel. That's all.

<<One of the old ones---that we invaded Iraq so that we could bring democracy to the Arab world>>

_{We ran so we could catch the bus}

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

CalifJim — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:44:17 GMT

Goodman,

In the relevant reading, where could is used in the affirmative in an attempt to convey the meaning succeeded, which is what Belly (and Michael Swan) were talking about, could cannot be used.

We ran; therefore, we [*could catch / were able to catch / succeeded in catching / caught] the bus.
____________

Compare the following two examples, with different meanings:

-- Were you able to notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, fortunately, I was able to.
(Meaning: Did you succeed in notifying the police ...? Yes, I succeeded.)
-----------------------------
-- Could you notify the police in time to prevent the crime?
-- Yes, I could.
(Meaning: Would you be able (hypothetically) to notify the police ...? Yes, I would.)
("Coded" meaning: Please notify the police .... Yes, I will.)
(Not the same meaning as above. could cannot be used to convey the "success" meaning above.)
____________

Certainly, could can be used in other readings, such as would be able to. This alternate reading is typical in a so that clause of purpose, examples of which you have quoted above.

CJ

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Goodman — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:53:25 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
why don't we put it in the sentence like: I was sitting, drinking coffee.
You can, but too many -ing's together is not generally considered good style. The participle with its -ing is meant to contrast with the rest of the sentence. But, as I said, it is perfectly fine to use both -ing's and say I was sitting, drinking coffee, if you really would like to.

We do not normally use could to say that sb did sth on one occasion.
Let's look at this carefully. It is true, but the key word here is did. seeing is not doing something. If I say I saw something, it doesn't mean that I actually did something. There is no action taking place; I'm not moving my body; I'm not manipulating any object. So this rule does not apply. It only applies to cases when there is a true action, like the following.

We ran, and so we were able to catch the bus. (Correct.)

But:

We were able to remember the trip. (Correct.)
We could remember the trip. (Also correct. This is not an action.)

CJ

Pardon me CJ,

Perhaps I missed something. This sentence sounded fine to me execpt maybe "that' is needed.

We ran, and so (that) we could catch the bus. (Not correct. This is an action. We did something.)

I also looked it up on the NET, that usage seemed to be common:

So That's Why We're in Iraq

One of the old ones---that we invaded Iraq so that we could bring democracy to the Arab world---is beginning to look a little dicey. ...
www.commondreams.org/views05/0831-25.htm - 15k - Cached - Similar pages

MichaelMoore.com : SiCKO : 'SiCKO' Blog

see it then but now I know that she left us so that we could make a better life for those who are in the same position as I was in. ...
www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/blog/labels/MLK%20Hospital.html - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

Naked in the Woods - Coronado Cave

Doped up on Nyquil, I stayed in bed all day Saturday in hopes that I could get rid of that nasty cold so that we could hike the next day. ...
www.arizonahikingtrails.com/nakedwoodspages/020799.html - 12k -

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

CalifJim — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:56:01 GMT

why don't we put it in the sentence like: I was sitting, drinking coffee.

You can, but too many -ing's together is not generally considered good style. The participle with its -ing is meant to contrast with the rest of the sentence. But, as I said, it is perfectly fine to use both -ing's and say I was sitting, drinking coffee, if you really would like to.

We do not normally use could to say that sb did sth on one occasion.

Let's look at this carefully. It is true, but the key word here is did. seeing is not doing something. If I say I saw something, it doesn't mean that I actually did something. There is no action taking place; I'm not moving my body; I'm not manipulating any object. So this rule does not apply. It only applies to cases when there is a true action, like the following.

We ran, and so we were able to catch the bus. (Correct.)
We ran, and so we could catch the bus. (Not correct. This is an action. We did something.)

But:

We were able to remember the trip. (Correct.)
We could remember the trip. (Also correct. This is not an action.)

CJ

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:09:11 GMT

Belly,

I think you are so terribly confused for some reason. Yes, you can say "I was sitting in the kitchen, sipping my favorite coffee and enjoying a quiet afternoon reading". The problem is not so much in the verb used in the main part of the sentence. Sat or sitting are both fine, depending on how you wanted to describe the scene. CJ, has given you excellent examples and explained the use of participle phrase already. If you keep resisting and arguing about the answers many have spent much time on trying to help you, it is not going to benefit you.

What you said about "could" and "able" is not true. I could say" when I was in my 20's, I [ was physically able]/ [could] to work fulltime and still went to school with good grades. I can't do that any more.

<<<Ex: How many eggs were you able to get? ( could you get is wrong)>>> This is not true either!

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Belly — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:24:04 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
drinking coffee is a participle phrase. The -ing makes it a participle. The use of a participle phrase does not violate parallelism. Often, it just means that a second action is happening at the same time as the main action.

I sat on the terrace, thinking about the stars.
= I sat on the terrace. At the same time, I was thinking about the stars.

Helen waited in the kitchen, reading a book.
= Helen waited in the kitchen. At the same time, she was reading a book.

Frank stood on the patio, looking at the broken fence.
= Frank stood on the patio. At the same time, he was looking at the broken fence.
___________

I could see means the same as I was able to see.

could need not imply an achievement. could can simply imply an ability in the past. Either could or was able to can be used in that sentence.

CJ

I didn't know that . Doing two things at the same time? If it is, why don't we put it in the sentence like: I was sitting, drinking coffee. The question's hanging over sat. Why didn't the author say: I was sitting but I sat?

Mr Swan said in his book:We use could for general ability- for example to say that sb could do sth at any time, whenever she/he wanted.

Ex: When I was younger, I could run 10km in under 40 minutes

We do not normally use could to say that sb did sth on one occasion.

Instead we use other expressions, to be able to are among them.

Ex: How many eggs were you able to get? ( could you get is wrong)

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

CalifJim — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 08:15:25 GMT

drinking coffee is a participle phrase. The -ing makes it a participle. The use of a participle phrase does not violate parallelism. Often, it just means that a second action is happening at the same time as the main action.

I sat on the terrace, thinking about the stars.
= I sat on the terrace. At the same time, I was thinking about the stars.

Helen waited in the kitchen, reading a book.
= Helen waited in the kitchen. At the same time, she was reading a book.

Frank stood on the patio, looking at the broken fence.
= Frank stood on the patio. At the same time, he was looking at the broken fence.
___________

I could see means the same as I was able to see.

could need not imply an achievement. could can simply imply an ability in the past. Either could or was able to can be used in that sentence.

CJ

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Hoa Thai — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:59:22 GMT

>I haven't seen that we can use past and past continuous in a sentence like that. (Not past continuous! An -ing noun)

Sure, you saw it - your sentence!

Here is a sentence with a similar construct:

"The group shows Queen Isabella seated on a Gothic chair, listening to the plans of Columbus" - http://columbus.vanderkrogt.net/es/granada.html

Hoa Thai

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:47:28 GMT

Belly wrote:
Clive wrote:

Hi,

)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee. From there I could see the vineyard and olive groves bellow me

- Why do we use drinking here but not drank? 'Drinking coffee' is an adjectival phrase describing 'I'. To use 'drank', you'd need to say 'I sat on the terrace and drank coffee'.

- Why use could here since could doesn't imply the idea" achievement on a particular occasion in the past", I think it would be better if we have were able to here. How about you? 'Could' here just means 'had the ability to', 'was able to'. eg 'When I was young, I could run a mile in 5 minutes'.

2)She was planning to ring her friend but she forgot This suggests the plan, the idea, came from her.

Can I use: She was to ring her friend.... This suggests an obligation that came from someone else or from some previous discussion. eg Perhaps her mother told her to call her friend, or perhaps 'she' promised earlier to call her friend.

3) Every child will have chance to go to vocational school or schools? Every child will have a/the chance to go to a vocational school.

Best wishes, Clive

Hi Clive,

I think , shares the same function as and. So according to parallel structure, we have to use drank here. If you say 'Drinking coffee' is an adjectival phrase describing I., how come it is used here without to be?

And could certainly doesn't mean be able to. If you say could does, so why do we have to use could here but not were able to?

Belly,

Adding to what others already explained, I''l offer my two cents' worth...

1) The advice given by Clive and Hao are correct. This type of structure is used quite often in everyday life. Of course we can use parallellism which will require the use of a lot of "ands" to connect the ideas together, and that will sound pretty boring. I will give you another example to illustrate the point: She stayed home last night, waiting for her boyfriend to call. Yes, you can replace "waiting" with "and waited" and it's perfectly fine. Instead, we often use adjectival (sometime called adverbial) phrases to connect the main idea and the subsequent act together. Learners just have to take the experts' words for it and observe how correct English is used

2) She was planning to call =/= She was to call. The former means a thought of calling. The latter means an obligation to call. If I said to you "you are to finish the project by tomorrow morning", I am saying, you must finish, not planning to finsih, no questions asked, no excuses.

3) It's "school", not schools.

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Belly — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:39:50 GMT

Hoa Thai wrote:
Belly wrote:

Ok I understood that drinking implies a continuous activity, but it may violate with the parallelsim, may not it?

Not really! This sentence contains the vilolation: "He sat at the terrace and was drinking coffee." One clause uses the simple past tense and the other uses the past progressive tense. In your previous sentence, 'drinking' is a gerund (a noun form of a verb). 'Drinking coffee' is noun phrase acts as an adjectival component.

Belly wrote:

According to my grammar book, could isn't used in context like this. Could is used when we generally referring to the past.

I don't know what you mean. Please quote your book.

Belly wrote:

I'm with you in the last question, Hoa Thai, I don't know why my teacher corrected so. Notwithstanding, you can see my original work at http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectEssay/zwlkz/Post.htm. It's my orginal work befored it was modified by my teacher.

Could you show what I shared with you to your teacher and ask for his opinion?

My take:

1. 'go to (vocational) school' represents a task students do.
2. 'go to a (vocational) school' represents an undefinitive selection.
3. I am troubled by 'go to (vocational) schools' and would like to hear others' opinions.

Take care,
Hoa Thai
EDIT NOTE: I will look at your other post and share with you my opinion later.
EDIT NOTE #2: I saw 'school' instead of 'schools' in your other post!

I haven't seen that we can use past and past continuous in like that. I sat there drinking coffee. What is an adjectival component? I sat there drinking coffee, which occurs first? which later?

Yes, the original was school, but my teacher corrected it into schools

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Hoa Thai — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:51:07 GMT

Belly wrote:
Ok I understood that drinking implies a continuous activity, but it may violate with the parallelsim, may not it?

Not really! This sentence contains the vilolation: "He sat at the terrace and was drinking coffee." One clause uses the simple past tense and the other uses the past progressive tense. In your previous sentence, 'drinking' is a gerund (a noun form of a verb). 'Drinking coffee' is noun phrase acts as an adjectival component.

Belly wrote:
According to my grammar book, could isn't used in context like this. Could is used when we generally referring to the past.

I don't know what you mean. Please quote your book.

Belly wrote:

I'm with you in the last question, Hoa Thai, I don't know why my teacher corrected so. Notwithstanding, you can see my original work at http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectEssay/zwlkz/Post.htm. It's my orginal work befored it was modified by my teacher.

Could you show what I shared with you to your teacher and ask for his opinion?

My take:

1. 'go to (vocational) school' represents a task students do.
2. 'go to a (vocational) school' represents an undefinitive selection.
3. I am troubled by 'go to (vocational) schools' and would like to hear others' opinions.

Take care,
Hoa Thai
EDIT NOTE: I will look at your other post and share with you my opinion later.
EDIT NOTE #2: I saw 'school' instead of 'schools' in your other post!

Re: 1)I sat on the terrace, drinking coffee.

Belly — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:22:20 GMT

Hoa Thai wrote:
Hi Belly,

Maybe my interpretation sent a wrong message. Allow me to try again.

What Clive said is correct about adjectival phrase. Look at this question: You sat at the terrace, doing what? drinking coffee. 'Drinking cofee' qualifies the "event of 'You sat at the terrace'." If I do not make any sense, Clive sure will.

Regarding 'could' and 'was able to', Clive gave a very clear explanation. Please review his writing one more time. If I am not wrong, he said they are the same in this context. 'Could' is more efficient with fewer words.

About, 'go to vocational school / schools', if we take out the word 'vocational' in your sentence, would you think that "Every child will have chance to go to school and learn" is less preferable than using 'schools' instead?

All the best,
Hoa Thai

Hi,

Ok I understood that drinking implies a continuous activity, but it may violate with the parallelsim, may not it?

According to my grammar book, could isn't used in context like this. Could is used when we generally referring to the past.

I'm with you in the last question, Hoa Thai, I don't know why my teacher corrected so. Notwithstanding, you can see my original work at http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectEssay/zwlkz/Post.htm. It's my orginal work before it was modified by my teacher.

There should be some typos, remind me if you should see one