Search results for 'tag:Auxiliaries tag:Modal auxiliaries' matching tags 'Auxiliaries' and 'Modal auxiliaries'

Re: Names of different tenses

Cool Breeze — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:58:41 GMT

Raen
He would have had completed the task if he had asked for help before he left work -- would have had completed used for had asked (past perfect) that happens before left (simple past)

Is it false then? "would have + (past perfect)" doesn't exist?

These terms may not be the same everywhere but the basic grammar of the language is the same all over the Anglo-Saxon world! Would have had completed is always wrong. Would is a defective/modal auxiliary and only an infinitive is possible after these auxiliaries. In this case the perfect infinitive must be used. There are two theoretical alternatives using your verbs. Either would have completed or would have had. All other combinations are wrong. The perfect infinitive consists of have + past participle. It is impossible to have another past participle right after a perfect infinitive. That is impossible in all Germanic languages, I believe.

Re: conditional

Anonymous — Mon, 12 May 2008 01:59:29 GMT

Thank you, Mr. M. Then, what are these ones I wrote? They have if-clauses and what look to be resultant clauses, and also, they seem to be good, sensible sentences.

All first conditional??

If I hear from you before I leave, I would call you when I get home.

If I get a raise this month, I would buy a new car.

If I play soccer every two days, I might beat this illness.

If I work hard, I might/would get a raise before the end of this month.

I think those are sentences I can use any day. What are they then? Should I not use any of them and as you seem to have recommended, change the modal auxiliary verbs in the main clause to 'will'?

Re: ? have something done

Mister Micawber — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:49:01 GMT

.
None of the answers makes sense in this context except C. The other modal auxiliaries carry inappropriate meanings. Start your study HERE, FOR INSTANCE.

Re: You need only see her. (Is this correct?)

Tanit — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:05:30 GMT

Viceidol

Hi, I know that auxiliary verb "need" cannot be used in affirmative statements, but how about this one? Is this correct?
You need only see her.

Hi,

Let me quote Swann (Practical English Usage, 3^rd ed., Â§ 366.2):

Need can also have the same present-tense forms as modal auxiliary verbs ... In this case, need is normally followed by an infinitive without to.
        She needn't reserve a seat - there'll be plenty of room.
These forms are used mainly in negative sentences (needn't), but they are also possible in questions, after if and in other 'non-affirmative' structures.
        You needn't fill in a form.
        Need I fill in a form?
        I wonder if I need fill in a form.
        This is the only form you need fill in. (BUT NOT ~~You need fill in a form~~.)

If we follow Swann, we can use need as a modal verb in an affirmative sentence when a 'non-affirmative' word (such as only, hardly, seldom etc.) gives the sentence a negative kind of meaning. Look at Swann's last example: the sentence becomes incorrect when only is removed.

That said, please notice this usage is mainly British.

Re: Modal verb Used to, understood?

Cool Breeze — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:23:21 GMT

Hi Eladio

You have a mathematical mind! Congratulations! In addition to what CalifJim and MrP have said, I would like to add a couple of comments. In one of your sentences not is in the wrong place:

"Shall not we ever get used to this house?"

Not can't be after a defective/modal auxiliary (shall) in a negative question unless it is contracted (shan't). Say:

Shall/will we not ever get used to this house? Or, better still:

Shan't/won't we ever get used to this house? / Shall/will we never get used to this house?

Secondly, used to need not indicate habitual action in the past. It is frequently used with verbs such as live and like:

He used to live here when he was a teenager.

The meaning is the same as: He lived here when he was a teenager.

Another example: I used to like the way she dressed in those days.

Cheers

Re: may/might

Yoong Liat — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:34:21 GMT

Hi Newguest

I have the following to share with you.

may / might

Similarly, we can use the modal auxiliaries may or might to say that there is a chance that something is true or may happen. May and might are used to talk about present or future events. They can normally be used interchangeably, although might may suggest a smaller chance of something happening. Compare the following:

I may go into town tomorrow for the Christmas sales. And James might come with me!
What are you doing over the New Year, Ann? ~ Oh, I may go to Scotland, but there again, I might stay at home.
If you go to bed early tonight, you may / might feel better tomorrow.
If you went to bed early tonight, you might feel better tomorrow.
One of my New Year resolutions is to go to the gym twice a week! ~ And pigs might fly!

Note that 'Pigs might fly' is a fixed expression and always uses might. It means that something will never happen.

In the first conditional example, will perhaps could be substituted.

If you go to bed early tonight, you may / might feel better tomorrow.

In the second conditional example, where might is an alternative for would perhaps, may cannot be substituted.

If you went to bed early tonight, you might feel better tomorrow.

Re: adverbs of probability

Mister Micawber — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:33:57 GMT

No; they are modal auxiliary verbs.

Adverbs of probability are such as likely, probably, possibly, feasibly, certainly.

Re: Non finite reduced adverbial clause????

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:11:12 GMT

Hello, Dr. E.T. Babalola!

I'm still uncertain of the third example you've given here. Are you fully convinced that the italicised part of the third example is a non-finite clause?

As I know, clauses can be divided into two kinds, namely finite clauses and non-finite clauses. The distinguishing characteristic between these two clauses is the verb within the clauses.The verb in finite clauses must be a finite verb whereas the verb in non-finite clauses is a non-finite verb. The finite verb shows tense whereas the non-finite one doesn't. Modal auxiliaries count as finite ones. And in the third example you've given, the italicised part contains a modal, "can't". I would say that the italicised part is not a non-finite clause, but it is indeed a finte clause.

Anyway, I agree with the rest of the satisfactory explanation.

Would you please consider the possibility of revising the part that I comment on, Doctor?

Thank you for your attention.

Re: 1) In the end I had to get a lift with a colleague

Belly — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 02:00:22 GMT

Cool Breeze wrote:
Hi Belly

1) You could use to get as well. Both the full infinitive (to get) and the plain/bare infintive (get) are correct after do in sentences like yours. There is an old song All I Have To Do Is Dream. It could just as well be All I Have To Do Is To Dream.

2) Not [a single] one is idiomatic and grammatical. Not any fitted is impossible because fitted is the finite/main verb (past tense) and the collocation not any/anything/anybody is never used as a grammatical subject. Not + any/anything/anybody is possible when any is an object:

I didn't see any boys there.
I didn't see anything there.
I didn't see anybody there.

3) Should is a defective/modal auxiliary and is therefore always followed by a plain infinitive: Should your information turn out to be true, ... However, the sentence is incomplete as there is no main clause.

CB

Hi CB, so we musn't to add not before any if it is a subject, how about just any? Ex: Anyone could do that!

Re: 1) In the end I had to get a lift with a colleague

Cool Breeze — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:23:55 GMT

Hi Belly

1) You could use to get as well. Both the full infinitive (to get) and the plain/bare infintive (get) are correct after do in sentences like yours. There is an old song All I Have To Do Is Dream. It could just as well be All I Have To Do Is To Dream.

2) Not [a single] one is idiomatic and grammatical. Not any fitted is impossible because fitted is the finite/main verb (past tense) and the collocation not any/anything/anybody is never used as a grammatical subject. Not + any/anything/anybody is possible when any is an object:

I didn't see any boys there.
I didn't see anything there.
I didn't see anybody there.

3) Should is a defective/modal auxiliary and is therefore always followed by a plain infinitive: Should your information turn out to be true, ... However, the sentence is incomplete as there is no main clause.

CB