"could" - past tense or past subjunctive

Question

Hi thereI have a question concerning the modal verb "could" - I would like to know whether it is only simple past or both simple past of "can" and past subjunctive of the same model verb.I am sure that "could" is simple past in any case, but at the same time it could be the result of phonetic changes in the past that led to a convergence of both forms the simple past and the past subjunctive of "can" in only one form of "could".In the sentence "I could not access my computer," "could" obviously is in the past tense.It is another thing using "could" in a conditional sentence. Example:"If I could access my computer, I would be able to write an e-mail."Is this example of a usage of "could" a past subjunctive instead of a past simple form?Are there other modal verbs that could serve as examples?Thanks in advance for your answers.

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

You will find a lot of background information here.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/could

The problem is that it has changed considerably since Old English, so what was true 500 years ago likely has changed along the way. The subjunctive mood has been slowly eroding from the core language, and now is only distinguishable in certain constructs. The verb, "be" seems to be the most resistant to this erosion.

CalifJim · Answer

anonymous"could" - past tense or past subjunctive

If you compare the use of 'could' in English to the same basic word in many European languages, you will find that English uses 'could' for the equivalent of the imperfect tense, the past subjunctive tense, and the conditional tense. (Spanish and Italian are good comparisons.)

When she was young, she could tap dance all day long.
(imperfect = English past, as in 'used to be able to')
If we could fly like birds, we could travel above the clouds as they do.
(past subjunctive = English past (though some people are still calling it 'past subjunctive');
conditional = English 'would', as in 'would be able to' here)

Don't confuse form with usage. 'could' is the past (also called the preterit) of 'can'. That's its form. However, as shown above, it has several uses.

anonymousI am sure that "could" is simple past in any case, but at the same time it could be the result of phonetic changes in the past that led to a convergence of both forms the simple past and the past subjunctive of "can" in only one form of "could".

You will have to do some research on the internet for this. Whatever happened happened centuries ago, and its hard to believe it has much practical value if you're learning modern English. You might find a way of satisfying your curiosity about it, but it's probably a lot of work for a small reward.

anonymousIn the sentence "I could not access my computer," "could" obviously is in the past tense.

Yes. In the negative 'could' is equivalent to a "European" preterit. Here, 'could not' is 'failed to'. I didn't mention this possibility above.

anonymousIf I could access my computer, I would be able to write an e-mail.

This is nearly identical to my example above regarding flying above the clouds. See that again for the explanation of the tenses. In your sentence 'would be able to' can be replaced by "conditional" could.

anonymousAre there other modal verbs that could serve as examples?

No. Each modal verb has its own peculiar properties. The can-could pair and the will-would pair are the only ones where we still have a present-past usage in English. Of these, will-would is busy acting as grammatical machinery for forming the future of the present and the future of the past, and only can-could is left with "real meaning" as a present-past pair. shall is rarely used anymore, and its partner should has come to have a present meaning. may and might have merged so as to be almost completely lacking in a sense of present vs past.

CJ

"could" - past tense or past subjunctive

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions