0
Brummel Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

Modal + Perfect Infinitive = Meaning?

0 Hello02br
02br
00I have trouble explaining modal auxiliaries to German speakers.02br
02br
01i00He must be drunk.02i02br
02br
00to put this into the past = 01i00He must have been drunk. 02i02br
02br
01i00She should see the doctor.02i02br
02br
00this into the past = 01i00she should have seen the doctor.02i02br
02br
00But ....02br
02br
01b01i00He can play the piano02i02b02br
02br
00into the past =? #1. he can have played the piano.... or ...... 02br
00 #2. he could have played the piano..... or.......02br
00 #3. he could play the piano 02br
02br
00#1 sounds strange to my English ears.02br
00#2 is subjunctive isn't it?02br
00#3 seems right but goes against trend with 'must' and 'should'02br
02br
00The word 'could' is both the simple past of can AND the subjunctive form of can, but I'm02br
00not complaining. It is the only one of 'must', 'should' and 'can' which has a past form.02br
00Perhaps therein lies the problem.02br
02br
00What are the detailed, (Oxford-)proper meanings of #1, #2 and #3?0-
  

Top answer

02b 02br 02br 01b 00She should have seen the doctor02b 00, two meanings:02br 01b 001. 02b 00 (= advice with reference to a past situation. "02br 02br 01b 002.

— Kooyeen

  • 02b 02br 02br 01b 00She should have seen the doctor02b 00, two meanings:02br 01b 001.
  • 02b 00 (= advice with reference to a past situation.
  • "02br 02br 01b 002.
  • She should have seen the doctor by now.
  • 02b 00 (= expectation.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

12 Answers
0
0 Hi, 02br
00this is what I know, I'm not sure it's ok, though.02br
02br
01b00He must be drunk02b00 (= deduction) 01b00---> He must have been drunk.02b02br
02br
01b00She should have seen the doctor02b00, two meanings:02br
01b001. She should have seen the doctor, why
0
0
0Hi Kooyeen, 02br
02br
00I have the same problem too but 01i00he couldn't play the piano02i00 sounds me as 01i00he wasn't able to play piano02i00.As for01i00 he couldn't have played the piano02i00, it sounds me as 01i00it was impossible for him to play the piano because he was doing something els
0
0
0 01blockquote
00#3. he could play the piano 12br
10 ...12br
10 #3 seems right but goes against trend with 'must' and 'should'12blockquote
11i00can/could02i00 is syntactically modal, but in this example it is semantically nonmodal -- it's just a verb having to do with the ability to do something. That's why it
0
0
0 01blockquote
01cite10CalifJim12cite10... and 11i10should have12i10 can be (but isn't always, to complicate things!) a past logical expectation about a situation that did not happen -- a counterfactual. (11i10should have but didn't12i10)12br
12br
10CJ12br
12br
11font
0
0
0 A) should have seen02br
02br
00 It was 01b00normal/highly probable/expected02b00 that I (would) see him, but I did 01b00not02b0-
0
0
0 Very good CalifJim!02br
02br
00This is all very interesting. This diverse collection of responses convinces me I am not confused with my own mother tongue.02br
02br
00However I was interested in the case with "can". 02br
02br
00I believe I saw in an Agatha Christie novel once : "He can have commited the murder, M. Poirot."02br
0
0
0 Hi Brummel02br
02br
00Welcome to the forums. Your reasoning regarding 01i00can02i00 and 01i00could02i00 is right, and what causes further problems is the fact that 01i00can02i00 has a number of meanings.02br
02br
01i00He can play the piano02i00 can be put in the past
0
0
0 01b00Can have [played] ...02b00 in affirmative is alive and well 02br
00 (the possibility exists that he/it had played ...)02br
02br
00 At the New York Times site (I know, some would say this is negative because of01i00 no02i00)02br
02br
01h2

01a

0
0
0 01blockquote
00I know, some would say this is negative because of11i10 no12i12blockquote
10Quite true, and I'm one of them.01i02br
02br
00 ... cannot have played any part ... 02i00is the equivalent -- of course.02br
02br
00 CJ0-
0

Related Questions