Can I use "be able to" here?

0They mean the same thing. But why use three words when you can just use one? 050010id1

0The reason why I ask this question is because my dictionary says 01b00when the subject is not living creature, we should use 01font00"can"02font00 rather than 01font00"be able to"02font02b00. But I'm doubtful about it. So I come here for more opinion.0-

0If you think about it quite literally, can a car really possess an ability? Well, not really. Cars are inanimate objects unable to possess anything. But I think that's just arguing semantics because like I said earlier, the two are pretty much synomous in meaning. One of the definitions for "can" is "to be inherently able."02br
02br
00When it doubt, use "can." You'll be more

0 01blockquote

01cite10Viceidol12cite10The reason why I ask this question is because my dictionary says 11b10when the subject is not living creature, we should use 11font10"can"12font10 rather than 11font10"be able to"12font12b10. But I'm doubt

0I would 01b00not02b00 use "car is able to run," it seems to be still avoided by careful editors, it doesn't show up 01b00at all02b00 at the BBC and the New York Times sites, while: 02br
007 from bbc.co.uk for "car can run"02br
00 136 from nytimes.com for "car can run" 0-

0In addition, the verb 'run' is not generally used the way you used it. (That's why I changed the verb to 'do'.) The verb 'run' is more often used to refer to how a car/ engine operates rather than how fast the car can go. You could use 'run' to talk about what sort of fuel the car uses, for example:02br
00"Some cars can be run on either diesel fuel or recycled vegetable oil. They

1blockquote

01cite10Viceidol12cite12br
10The reason why I ask this question is because my dictionary says 11b10when the subject is not living creature, we should use 11font10"can"12font10 rather than 11font10"be able to"12font12b10. But I'm

Yes, you can use "be able to" provided there is end of the activity after the performance.

Best regards