In Modals^x

> So, the modal 'should' can function in the past-time settings as well as in the present-time settings? Yes. Most of the modals do that. They're are quite time-independent.

. Yes, we use 'had to' for past 'must' since the verb is imperfect-- it hasn't a past form for this use. Should after suggested , etc is a different should -- it is called putative- should , and is a mostly BrE equivalent of the subjunctive: He suggested that I go to church...

Thank you. So, the modal 'should' can function in the past-time settings as well as in the present-time settings? I think I heard from someone that a past form of 'should' is 'had to'. On a second thought, I think I have heard something to the effect that the past form of...

. He said you should give him the watch . This is reported speech. 'That ' is optional here and usually is.

Hi, I am encountering difficulty in distinguishing whether there should be a pair of quotation marks around for a case like this. I feel, a lot of times, people skip the word 'that' or do not care to put quotation marks if what is noted requires the punctuation marks. He said you should...

In some cases this is possible, but not in general. You would typically have some sort of modal verb there. I'm sorry you are leaving us so soon. I'm sorry you have to have such a serious operation next month. I'm sorry you can't attend the party tonight. CJ

> got stuck on what it is saying here on its tutorial on "would". would be nice to always post the links involved

I'm not sure what you would like me to comment on, so I'll offer some random remarks that may or may not touch on your concerns. Note, in particular, the so ... that ... structure in the original ( It was so quiet that ... ) is a complicating factor. Secondly, the semi-modal have to in...

In other words, "I wanted to know if the train would arrive on time" is wrong? I consider it correct because if does not denote condition in the sentence. CB

REMEMBER No Future in Time Clauses will is the mark of the Future of the Present. would is the mark of the Future of the Past. This reminder applies to both "Futures". It means: No will or would in subordinate clauses introduced by conjunctions such as when, before, after , etc. ...