Would Usage

Question

This is a paragraph from Wikipedia."The first artificial pacemaker was invented by Dr. Mark C Lidwell. The primitive device would transmit electronic pulses through the heart."What is the tense of the paragraph? Was would, followed by transmit (which is in present tense), used correctly in this case?

Avangi · Accepted Answer

"The first artificial pacemaker was invented by Dr. Mark C Lidwell. The primitive device would transmit electronic pulses through the heart."

The usage is correct. It's simple past.
"Would" in this case simply means "was capapable of."

The Model T Ford would only run four miles on a gallon of gas. (I made that up.

)

You may substitute "could" in both of these sentences, but "would" lets us know that the actions were in fact carried out.

Well, sometimes these modals are hard to pin down.
The Stanley Steamer would/could go 200 miles per hour. (true fact)
My dog would eat a horse, if he had the opportunity.

It's easy to confuse this with a use similar to historical present tense:

"In 1920, Jones would go on to win the title." (In 1920, Jones goes on to win the title.)

Pkr · Answer

AvangiIt's easy to confuse this with a use similar to historical present tense:"In 1920, Jones would go on to win the title." (In 1920, Jones goes on to win the title.)

Why do we use past tense "would" in historical present? I thought in historical present we used present tense instead of past tense ?

Thanks!

Cool Breeze · Answer

AnonymousWhat is the tense of the paragraph?

Simple past tense.

AnonymousWas would, followed by transmit (which is in present tense), used correctly in this case?

Yes. However, transmit is an infinitive, not a simple present tense. The infinitive is required by the auxiliary would, which in this sentence means used to.

CB

Cool Breeze · Answer

Funny!

Before I replied, my screen showedzero replies to this post. There are still some bugs.

CB

CalifJim · Answer

I'm not sure it's actually a bug. The number of replies to each post seems like it's being updated more slowly than it used to be, but that may be because of changes in the code in this version.

CJ

Avangi · Answer

Hi, pkr,
Looks like I stepped in it.

"Would" is not really used in historical present. The example I gave "resembles" the use of the historical present, in my opinion.

I don't think the modals are actually considered to have tenses in the normal sense. (I'm pitifully weak on modals, and should have known better than to broach the subject.)

present tense - I must go.
past tense - I had to go.

Avangi · Answer

Okay, CB. Educate me!

I would go there every day.

If "would" is an auxilliary and "go" is an infinitive, where the heck is the main verb?

Best wishes, - A.

Okay, I have it. But what tense is it??

Avangi · Answer

Cool BreezeFunny! Before I replied, my screen showed zero replies to this post. There are still some bugs.CB

I feel your pain, CB. We've been all over the map on this. The new version they put in last December was pretty good at updating the lists. When V6 first went in it was also pretty good. But now you answer an "unanswered post" and trip over the bodies.

Cool Breeze · Answer

AvangiIf "would" is an auxilliary and "go" is an infinitive, where the heck is the main verb?

I don't know! Avangi, sometimes I just have to usesome grammatical terms when I write my posts. I am painfully aware that a lot of the terms I am used to are not used by natives at all. Main verb is a term that isn't even used in Scandinavia. We have a term for a verb that expresses the tense in a clause, but personally I am never sure whether I should say main verb or finite verbin English. (And I don't really care! Either one is fine with me!

We only have one term in Finnish -- and it resembles neither English term in appearance or when translated word for word.)

I have no idea what Americans think of the modal/defective auxiliaries with regard to grammatical tenses. As I would go there every day equals I used to go there every day in meaning, it seems logical to consider would a past tense verb form in this particular meaning. If anyone wants to call it something else, I have absolutely no objection! I am not in the least trying to impose my views on anybody, just explaining my reasoning.

My inclination to call would past tense stems from the days I attended school. In my English grammar book would was called a past tense in that meaning, probably just to help Finnish students understand the meaning more clearly. (We have no modal auxiliaries.) Mind you, will can be used in the present tense for the same meaning in the second and third persons, not with I and we. (That's what my Finnish grammar book taught us, and I think I have come to the conclusion over the years that the book was right about will in that sense.)

Can / could is another auxiliary pair that, in my opinion anyway, can be used to refer to the present and to the past respectively:

I can swim across the river. = I am able to swim across the river.
I could swim well when I was five years old. = I was able to swim well when I was five years old.

The other defective auxiliaries are less often or rarely used in ways that can be said to be more or less clearly in the present or past tense. What point in time is meant is usually expressed by the choice of the infinitive: the present infinitive usually refers to the present time or the future and the perfect infinitive (if Americans call it that?) usually refers to the past - but not always, though. Examples:

I should go there. (now, tomorrow)
I should have gone there. (yesterday)

He must be rich. (now)
He must have been rich. (in the past)

He would buy a car if he had enough money.
He would have bought a car if he had had enough money.

But: The USA will have solved all her problems by the year 2015. (The reference is to the future even though the perfect infinitive is used!)

CB

Avangi · Answer

Thanks, CB. You may have guessed I don't spend a lot of time thinking about modals and conditionals, as the rules don't seem very well integrated. The process of learning them all without being able to find a sense of order would not be "energy efficient" at my tender age.
When my ear leaves me in doubt, I usually (not always) have the sense to steer clear.
Your post has helped focus some of my thoughts.

Best wishes, - A.

(Somebody moved the beer!)

Would Usage

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions