Re: Can't have to be replaced by couldn't?

just the truth — Sat, 15 Jan 2005 06:43:44 GMT

CJ: Nevertheless, "The doesn't have anything to do with past time or past tense" simply doesn't ring true to me. At the time of his speaking (past time) he didn't want to go.
Any basic grammar book will tell you "didn't" is the past tense of "doesn't".

JT: But what those grammar books don't tell you, Jim, is that past tense FORMS are used for purposes other than past time/tense.

It doesn't really matter when the speech reaches your ears. Reports of speech are usually made because they still have some significance to now. The reported event most often has not taken place yet. Proof of that is that we can choose to relate the words as a direct quote.

Why should the direct quote be taken as NOT a past tense/time but the reported, of the same event, I must remind you, be determined to be a past tense/time event? Strange, isn't it?

Here's but one example:

JT: I'm going to Jim's to have a chat with him.

Paco: [phones immediately and reports this speech to Mr P & Mr M]

JT said that he was going to Jim's to have a chat with him.

How can the indicate any past sense? It doesn't indicate that I've been to your place, does it, Jim?

All it indicates is that Paco has chosen to mark his speech as reported. He is telling Mr P & Mr M that he isn't quoting me directly.

The only thing that is actually finished is what I said and that is marked appropriately by Paco making use of the past tense for , ie. . Up to this point, I remain, sitting here at my computer.

{This has important implications wrt the modal verbs. Reported speech has long been offered as the only proof that modal verbs have tense. But from what I've shown you here, the backshifting that takes place in reported speech has nothing to do with tense in its normal accepted idea of denoting a finished action.}

CJ: Also, I don't think "to do" is a modal.

JT: I don't recall where I said it was, Jim.

CJ: Moreover, I'm not inclined to agree that modals only introduce the personal, emotive feelings of speakers. "One must breathe oxygen to remain alive" seems to me a rather unemotional fact (unless one is drowning, I suppose!).

JT: That's your opinion, stated strongly by the use of . In actual fact, we breathe nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide and some other trace gases. But it matters not at all if you're right or wrong about your statements

An unemotional fact would be,

One breathes oxygen to remain alive.

By adding you've added an emotional quality to the verb . Another person, not so well informed might say,

One might have to breathe oxygen to remain alive. {or "probably has to" or "may have to"}

["probably" is a periphrastic modal]

Even in my statement above, I added the emotive modal, . I could have have said,

An unemotional fact is,

softened my offering.

CJ: "You can't add 2 and 2 and get 5" is another rather impersonal utterance.

JT: As I said, it doesn't matter about the veracity of your statement. You've expressed your opinion on this issue by using . You could have chosen to use
So in the initial example,

"He said he didn't want to go."

and with the opportunity to go still available, the meaning would be glossed as, "He doesn't want to go."

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

Re: Can't have to be replaced by couldn't?