0
Chikaine Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Passive
What is the tense of the verb in "it could be eaten easily"?
The auxilary "be" is an infinitive", "eaten" is a past an "could" is a past, in that case, which one dominates and gives it's tense to the whole?
Do infinitive passives exist??
The auxilary "be" is an infinitive", "eaten" is a past an "could" is a past, in that case, which one dominates and gives it's tense to the whole?
Do infinitive passives exist??
Top answer
The whole sentence is in the past because of 'could' = 'was able to' (past) Do infinitive passives exist?? -------- I am not sure I understood you but: 'He was asked to bring it to the class' asked - V3: 'to' never comes before it, as far as I know. to bring - to + bare infinitive Do I understand you?
- The whole sentence is in the past because of 'could' = 'was able to' (past) Do infinitive passives exist??
- -------- I am not sure I understood you but: 'He was asked to bring it to the class' asked - V3: 'to' never comes before it, as far as I know.
- to bring - to + bare infinitive Do I understand you?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
The whole sentence is in the past because of 'could' = 'was able to' (past)
Do infinitive passives exist??
--------
I am not sure I understood you but:
'He was asked to bring it to the class'
asked - V3: 'to' never comes before it, as far as I know.
to bring - to + bare infinitive
Do I understand you?
Do infinitive passives exist??
--------
I am not sure I understood you but:
'He was asked to bring it to the class'
asked - V3: 'to' never comes before it, as far as I know.
to bring - to + bare infinitive
Do I understand you?
00
Hello!
There is a passive infinitive:
(to) be+ past participle = passive infinitive.
just like you can have a past infinitive:
(to) have + past participle
EG: to give : (active) infinitive
to be given : passive infinitive
to have given : past infinitive
There is a passive infinitive:
(to) be+ past participle = passive infinitive.
just like you can have a past infinitive:
(to) have + past participle
EG: to give : (active) infinitive
to be given : passive infinitive
to have given : past infinitive
00
thnaks for answering me.
the sentence you used is different from mine cause it shows a complex transitive structure in which "to bring" modifies "he" and does not follow the verb directly when you turn the sentence to the active voice( that's what I've read but maybe misunderstood cause i'm not a native speaker)...
You are saying that the auxilary (could) gives the tense of the whole se
the sentence you used is different from mine cause it shows a complex transitive structure in which "to bring" modifies "he" and does not follow the verb directly when you turn the sentence to the active voice( that's what I've read but maybe misunderstood cause i'm not a native speaker)...
You are saying that the auxilary (could) gives the tense of the whole se
00
Hello Chikaine
Yes you are right. In English the tense of a sentence is borne by the verb or modal which is positioned first in the sentence. They are called "finite verb" and "could" is the finite verb in your case. The 'be eaten' is a bare infinitive of passive form and it isn't a tense bar
The auxilary (could) gives the tense of the whole sentence, am I wrong?
Yes you are right. In English the tense of a sentence is borne by the verb or modal which is positioned first in the sentence. They are called "finite verb" and "could" is the finite verb in your case. The 'be eaten' is a bare infinitive of passive form and it isn't a tense bar
00
"could" as the past of "can" is only one possible interpretation, the one in which the sentence means, "At that time it was possible to eat it easily" or "At that time one had the ability/opportunity to eat it easily".
But there is also a reading of this sentence in which the eating is possible, but tentatively, in the present. Here "could" means something like "would be possible (now)
But there is also a reading of this sentence in which the eating is possible, but tentatively, in the present. Here "could" means something like "would be possible (now)
00
0
I just want to point out the word "could" is indicative of the subjunctive mood and not merely the past as another commenter stated. Could can be in the future. I could do something that I have yet to do.
00
AnonymousI just want to point out the word "could" is indicative of the subjunctive moodModal verbs don't have tenses and moods in the way that other verbs do. could certainly acts like a past subjunctive in
If I could help you, I would.
but could, like several other modals, can act in other ways as well,
00
So do you want to know what tense it is? Easily is an adv.; it is a pronoun. The verb is could be eaten, and therefore I believe it's present perfect progressive.
0
Related Questions