0
Anonymous Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Would/could
Salaam!
He would go.
That's it; that's the sentence. How would you interpret the tense in a short sentence like this?
I guess we should simply assume it is present tense in such instances. Suppose there are other words like, 'They persuaded him so that he would go.' In this case, because 'persuaded' is past, would also functions as past of will. Otherwise, would, might, should etc. (except could) must be treated as present tense. Could alone is the exception. He could go is both present (he is able to go) and past tense (he was able to go).
Is my understanding right?
He would go.
That's it; that's the sentence. How would you interpret the tense in a short sentence like this?
I guess we should simply assume it is present tense in such instances. Suppose there are other words like, 'They persuaded him so that he would go.' In this case, because 'persuaded' is past, would also functions as past of will. Otherwise, would, might, should etc. (except could) must be treated as present tense. Could alone is the exception. He could go is both present (he is able to go) and past tense (he was able to go).
Is my understanding right?
Top answer
He would go. Too many questions to digest in one gulp. Of course, context is everything.
- He would go.
- Too many questions to digest in one gulp.
- Of course, context is everything.
- As a stand-alone , I take it as describing habitual behavior.
- He was always taking off.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
11 Answers
0
He would go.
Too many questions to digest in one gulp.
Of course, context is everything.
As a stand-alone, I take it as describing habitual behavior. He was always taking off.
My sentence is past continuous, but I've heard a rumor that modals don't have tenses.
The second mos
Too many questions to digest in one gulp.
Of course, context is everything.
As a stand-alone, I take it as describing habitual behavior. He was always taking off.
My sentence is past continuous, but I've heard a rumor that modals don't have tenses.
The second mos
00
Speculation is a poor substitute for actual context. As it stands, it means nothing to me, and it might take pages to offer all the possible meanings in context.
00
PhilipSpeculation is a poor substitute for actual context. As it stands, it means nothing to me, and it might take pages to offer all the possible meanings in context.Well said. [Y]
00
Salaam Philip,
I don't mean to speculate. "He would/should/might/must go" could mean either present or future, but never the past (as stand-alone sentences). But "he could go" could mean either past (as in 'he was able to go') or present/future (as in 'he would be able to go').
All I am saying is, only 'could' could refer to any tense as a stand-alone sentence. Others can never
I don't mean to speculate. "He would/should/might/must go" could mean either present or future, but never the past (as stand-alone sentences). But "he could go" could mean either past (as in 'he was able to go') or present/future (as in 'he would be able to go').
All I am saying is, only 'could' could refer to any tense as a stand-alone sentence. Others can never
00
Anonymous"He would/should/might/must go" could mean either present or future, but never the past (as stand-alone sentences). ... only 'could' could refer to any tense as a stand-alone sentence. Others can never refer to the past unless there are other clauses (in past tense).No. would, like could, can be taken as an indicator of a past situatio
00
Avangiexplaining that "would" is an auxilliary, requiring the infinitive. So we have a sentence with no finite verb.All modals are finite. They have no non-finite forms at all. Being an auxiliary by no means disqualifies a verb from being finite.
00
Salaam Jim, thanks for clearing that up. Is would in your examples used as past tense of will? Are the sentences in your example considered past narrative?
00
AnonymousIs would in your examples used as past tense of will? ... past narrative?Yes. You may substitute will for would in those examples if you want the corresponding present tense situations.
CJ
00
CalifJimBeing an auxiliary by no means disqualifies a verb from being finite.Thanks, Jim.
Assuming then that modals may serve as auxilliaries, and knowing that the "other" auxilliaries function at times as "main verbs," are we saying that they all (as particles, if I may) are simultaneously auxilliaries and finite?
(I understand you're no
00
Avangithey all (as particles, if I may) are simultaneously auxilliaries and finite?Yes. "They" (i.e., modal verbs) are all simultaneously auxiliaries and finite. have, be, and do can also be simultaneously auxiliaries and finite, but can be non-auxiliary and/or non-finite as well. (I think that covers all the relevant combinations. )
0
Related Questions