0
Anonymous Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Might, should
Namaste,
Though he is a strong man, he might cry. Though he was a strong man, he might cry.
Though it is little, it should be enough. Though it was little, it should be enough.
Does the function of might/should remain the same in both tenses?
Though he is a strong man, he might cry. Though he was a strong man, he might cry.
Though it is little, it should be enough. Though it was little, it should be enough.
Does the function of might/should remain the same in both tenses?
Top answer
Though he is a strong man, he might cry. Though he was a strong man, he might have cried . Though it is little, it should be enough.
- Though he is a strong man, he might cry.
- Though he was a strong man, he might have cried .
- Though it is little, it should be enough.
- Though it was little, it should have been enough.
- Anonymous Does the function of might/should remain the same in both tenses?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
Though he is a strong man, he might cry.
Though he was a strong man, he might have cried.
Though it is little, it should be enough.
Though it was little, it should have been enough.
Though he was a strong man, he might have cried.
Though it is little, it should be enough.
Though it was little, it should have been enough.
AnonymousDoes the function of might/should remain the same in both tenses?Yes, if you use the present perfect tense.
00
THank u, alpheccastars. Is this correct. He wonders if someone might help him. He wondered if someone might have helped him. She thinks they should leave. She thought they should have left.
00
AnonymousDoes the function of might/should remain the same in both tenses?No. Not really.
might is sometimes seen in the context of the past as you have written it, especially in older texts, but it is much less used that way in modern English. might (as opposed to might have) is used almost exclusively for a present situatio
00
0
This is getting complicated! You're putting these modals into subordinate clauses and using them with different meanings, so other factors come into play.
When might expresses willingness, you don't add have for the past. The same goes for could, which has nearly the same meaning in this context. These may be considered politeness or "tentative" forms.
When might expresses willingness, you don't add have for the past. The same goes for could, which has nearly the same meaning in this context. These may be considered politeness or "tentative" forms.
0
Related Questions