Search results for 'tag:Modal verbs tag:Negatives' matching tags 'Modal verbs' and 'Negatives'

Re: or /nor

New2grammar — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:29:11 GMT

Or and Nor are killing me! The following are the combinations that I know of

Either ...or
Neither...nor
isn't/doesn't/negative modal verbs ...or (why NOR is possible???)

He doesn't eat spaghetti or sushi (nor sushi??)

Please help.

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: Using "could" making a question

Anonymous — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 04:16:27 GMT

It could rain tomorrow. means that it is possible that it will rain. The modal verb 'could' expresses possibility.

The negative would normally be expressed by "It couldn't possibly rain tomorrow." (we're in the desert!) or "It's not possible that it will rain tomorrow." (we've had rain for 40 days and 40 nights, and it's ludicrous to add on another day of rain!) or by the opinion, "I don't think it will rain tomorrow."

So, the sentence, "It could rain tomorrow." means "It is possible that it will rain."

Therefore, the question, "Is it possible for it to rain tomorrow?" and the negative, "It is not possible that it will rain tomorrow." are not so common, and therefore, sound odd.

V.C.

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: did or was

Philip — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 16:10:27 GMT

Anonymous wrote:

Hi,

Sometimes I get confused which one to used in the situations like the one or ones below.

Did he go to school on Sunday?

Was he born in Japan?

Why one takes a modal verb 'did', whereas the other one takes an auxiliary verb 'was'? How can I make correct choices?

'Go' is a regular verb that uses do/does/did in the formation of negatives and questions.

'Born' is actually the past participle of 'bear', here used in the passive. 'He was born [by his mother until his birth]' has become shortened to 'he was born', which is now the common expression, people not even thinking of the actual meaning. Dictionaries now list it as an adjective in its own right: 'brought into life by birth'.

Re: How to say using modal verb?

Fandorin — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:58:41 GMT

Hmm...But why can't I use "any longer" in this case or it's using only in negative way ? And how I understand it's impossible to use can with future tenses and it's implied that "can" relate to present and future, isn't it?

If I say : "How can I work hereafter?" Will it be correct?

Re: Politeness using negative questions

Kooyeen — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:09:52 GMT

Hi again,
I think you guys are right. maybe now I understand. I just read some stuff on the net about negative questions, plus one of Jim's posts, and this "idea" I had seems the right one:

Kooyeen wrote:
Idea! Maybe that only works with modals and with requests, not permissions? So couldn't you, wouldn't you, won't you, can't you... are used for politeness, but can't I, couldn't I, don't you, aren't you... only sound like you're insisting, which is the opposite of being polite?

Negative questions are possible with modals, but they are not going to sound more polite, but a little less polite instead, because they imply a positive answer is expected and so they actually sound a little more demanding. -> Wouldn't you like a cookie? Couldn't you answer my question?
When there are no modals, a positive answer is still expected, and negative questions are not used to ask a neutral or polite question.

What made me change my mind was an article written by someone who had a non-native (Russian) boss who sounded really rude because of his negative questions, which he thought they were a polite way to ask everything. If I hadn't found out about this, I would have end up like him, LOL.

I still have a problem: I said asking negative questions with modal verbs is still considered "polite", even though it sounds a little bit more demanding (Could you...? ---> Couldn't you...? // Would you...? ---> Wouldn't you...? // etc.)
I'm afraid (but not sure) there are some exceptions.
First exception: not all modals. Can might be an exception (Can you...? ---> Can't you?) and he negative might not be accepted among the "polite" expressions. Can you give me one? ---> Can't you give me one?
Second exception: this might not work with the first person I or we (Can I...? Could I...? ---> Can't I...? Couldn't I?) and the negative wouldn't sound polite anymore. Could I go out? ---> Couldn't I go out?

Sorry if this thread is a mess... this is very different in Italian, and I'd like to avoid sounding rude or annoying someone without wanting to.
Thanks a lot in advance.

Re: Tag question with Need

Belly — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:09:26 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
need is a normal verb in the affirmative, a normal or modal verb in the negative.
(Don't forget to change the affirmative-negative polarity in the tag.)

You need money, don't you? [normal; affirmative]
I needn't do that, need I? [modal; negative]
I don't need to do that, do I? [normal; negative]

CJ

So that means I can write:

I needn't do that, need I?

right?

Re: Tag question with Need

CalifJim — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 06:34:57 GMT

need is a normal verb in the affirmative, a normal or modal verb in the negative.
(Don't forget to change the affirmative-negative polarity in the tag.)

You need money, don't you? [normal; affirmative]
I needn't do that, need I? [modal; negative]
I don't need to do that, do I? [normal; negative]

CJ

Re: more examples please

CalifJim — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:51:55 GMT

If I understand your questions correctly, then 'yes' to all of them.

You can apply the same rules to quoted or parenthesized content.
Quoted contents are free to assume many grammatical roles.

Your two examples in italics are correct, except need is a modal verb in the negative, so it should be need not, not needs not.

Also, it's carte blanche.

CJ