Hello I have trouble explaining modal auxiliaries to German speakers. He must be drunk. to put this into the past = He must have been drunk. She should see the doctor. this into the past = she should have seen the doctor. But .... He can play the

Jackson6612 wrote: I hope this sentence is correct. Your teacher may have discussed the sequence of tenses. Can we use might in place of may? If we cannot do that then please let me know the reason. Your teacher might have discussed the

Could is the past tense of can . These two words are among the many that form a class of MAV modal auxiliary verbs called the ‘pure’modals. AV’s (Auxiliary verbs) are helping verbs that help the main verbs to convey additional information. MAV’s

Inchoateknowledge wrote: What does (simple) future tense mean in this sentence? The grammarian (it is a grammarian, isn't it?) you're quoting would probably tell you that there is no future tense. Many linguists claim English has only two

One such grammatical distinction causing much confusion is the use of the modal auxiliaries ‘may’ and ‘might’. When used in the present tense, the two modals are almost transposable, as the difference between the two is merely a very small degree

to be allowed to is a semi auxiliary, and the modal is an auxiliary ( modal auxiliary) to be allowed to expresses modal or aspectual meaning.

About modal auxiliaries .... Do we have some equivalent in Spanish ? how can I learn them ? is there any trick to know the answer ?

You may want to read what Professor Lawler said elsewhere: -------------- >"I should go." "I ought to go." >Is there any difference ? >(Needless to say I'm not a native English speaker.) There isn't much difference. "Ought" is the

need + infinitive ( need is a full verb) need to + infinitive ( need is a modal auxiliary) -----------------------------------------------

Hiya GB ! Well I asked myself a similar question sometime ago... I think the answer is that the verb 'to need' also works as a modal auxiliary. So for instance you can say "oh please, you needn't bother" which is obviously a case of using it as