0
Debpriya De Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

Use of be

1. We lost the bet.
That can't be.
2. Is she the real owner of this place ?
That could be.
3. Will he return home tomorrow ?
That could be.
What is the meaning of "be" in the above sentences ? I think the meaning is something between "to exist" and "to happen". Is such usage acceptable in formal speech ?
  

Top answer

Used more often informally, it simply means: that's possible.

— Philip

  • Used more often informally, it simply means: that's possible.
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.

10 Answers
0
Used more often informally, it simply means: that's possible.
0
0
Debpriya DeWhat is the meaning of "be" in the above sentences ?
be in all its forms (like is, are, was, were) is used as a linking verb. Here, the link is to the adjective surprising:

That is surprising. / That may be surprising. / That could be surprising.

If you have a modal verb like will, can, could, may,
0
0
What about the sentences "Why do you think that is ?" and "Why is that ?" ?

Here we have "is" instead of "be". Do they follow the same rule ?
0
0
Debpriya De Do they follow the same rule ?
Yes. When you don't have a modal verb (could, may, etc.) you use is instead of be. The modal verb is what forces the use of the bare infinitive be.

That is a pen. / That could be a pen.

Why is that? is like Why is that true? It's a
0
0
@CJ, I was looking up "be" in an online dictionary and I came across the following entry:
v.intr.
1. To exist in actuality; have life or reality: I think, therefore I am.


Would you say "am" in the above sentence is a linking verb ?
0
0
Debpriya DeWould you say "am" in the above sentence is a linking verb ?
No. In rare cases the forms of be have the exact same meaning as "exist".

It was Rene Descartes who said, "I think; therefore, I am", but one day in 1650 he forgot to keep thinking and he died!
0
0
Okay, thanks for your replies. I get it now.
0
0
However, it only works, as far as I know, with the modals can't, could, couldn't, may, and might, so you see that the pattern is very restricted.Also with shall and should...
0
0
AnonymousAlso with shall and should...
Really?
These don't sound correct at all to my ear:

Debpriya De:

1. We lost the bet.
That should be.
2. Is she the real owner of this place ?
That should be.
3. Will he r
0
0
Hi,
CalifJimIt was Rene Descartes who said, "I think; therefore, I am", but one day in 1650 he forgot to keep thinking and he died! CJ
Or he wanted to create the negative form of that statement, so he said, "I don't think; therefore, I am not" --
and, poof, the rest is history!
0

Related Questions