Level: beginner
The modal verbs are:
| can may must shall will |
could might should would |
We use modals to show if we believe something is certain, possible or impossible:
My keys must be in the car.
It might rain tomorrow.
That can't be Peter's coat. It's too small.
We also use them to do things like talk about ability, ask permission, and make requests and offers:
I can't swim.
May I ask a question?
Could I have some tea, please?
Would you like some help?
- Modal verbs
Average
Hello team
Help me with this question as well.
The German force lost no time in retreat lest they _____ be cut off and surrounded.
(a) would (b) should (c) might (d) could
My choice is option d) could. But not sure.
Hello mailofsus,
This question is answered in the comment below.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello Team,
Could you please tell me the correct option for the following question.
If I get the required assistance, I ________ pass the exam in the first attempt.
a) shall b) cannot c) might d) could
I know that option b) is not correct. But not sure about the other options. Kindly provide me explanation for your choice as well.
Hello mailofsus,
We normally ask our users to tell us what they think the answers are and their reasons for choosing the answers. It helps us to understand where you are coming from and thus help you better.
It's helpful to know that you see the answer is not b) and you are right about that. Please read a bit more about 'shall' on Requests, offers and invitations, 'might' and 'could' on Probability and more on 'could' on Ability and then let us know what you think.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello Kirk
Well, the sentence in the question is talking about possibility I suppose.
1) If I get the required assistance, I ________ pass the exam in the first attempt.
a) shall b) cannot c) might d) could
If option b is eliminated then considering might as the least degree of possibility followed by could, option a) shall, is my choice. But I am not sure to give clear grammar-based explanation.
2) The German force lost no time in retreat lest they _____ be cut off and surrounded.
(a) would (b) should (c) might (d) could
For the 2nd question, generally ‘lest; is followed by ‘should’. But I feel ‘could’ is the correct option. Again thinking about possibility, the verb ‘lost’ is in past tense and why can’t I use ‘could’? Do I need to follow lest… should… combination always? Please clarify and let me know the correct option for both questions.
TIA
Hi TIA,
Thanks for explaining your thinking.
For 1), I'd say that either c) or d) are correct. 'might' would express probability and 'could' could express the same idea of possibility or it could express ability. a) is not a correct answer since we really only use 'shall' in offers or invitations. I agree that b) is wrong because it doesn't make any sense.
Re: 2), I would choose 'should' here. In this case, i.e. when used with 'lest', 'should' expresses something more like possibility (this a use of 'should' that is fairly rare in modern English). My second option would be to leave the gap unfilled, i.e. 'lest they be cut off ...', which is also correct. The reason you give for choosing 'could' makes sense to me, but I wouldn't choose it. I'm not sure I'd say it's incorrect, but it definitely sounds wrong to me. I wish I could give you a stronger answer, but I'm not so familiar with the rules for somewhat archaic forms such as 'lest'.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hi Kirk,
Thank you very much for the explanation.
For the 1st question, If two options (might and could) are correct, then how to choose the best answer.
Won't it give confusion to the learners?
Hello mailofsus,
You're welcome!
I'm afraid you'd have to ask your the person who wrote the exam about that.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello team. Could you please help me choose the correct answer? I think a, b , and d are possible answers, right?
- Speaking to native speakers ......... a way of improving your fluency. It is a good idea to do this.
a) should be b) could be c) should have been d) might be
Thank you.
Hello Ahmed Imam,
A, B and D are all possible. C does not make sense in this context as the time reference does not fit.
To be honest, I'm not sure any of these answers sound particularly natural. I imagine the test writer anticipates 'should' because of the second sentence, but the most natural word here is simply 'is' in my view. If the second sentence were not there then B and D would be fine.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Team. Could you please help me? Does "had to" mean that the action happened or might not? For example, is the following sentence correct? Some teachers say that it is not correct while others say it is OK, what do you say?
- I had to call my friend but I forgot.
Thank you.
Hello Ahmed Imam,
It is possible to say this. Had to does not necessarily imply that the obligation/requirement was met. For example, it's fine to say this:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello,
"Had to" as the positive and "didn't have to" as the negative form are in the past. And therefore what I gather from your sentence is = you were supposed to call your friend but you didn't (Now, it's too late).
Bye :)
I had to call my friend but i forgot
this sentence is fine. But when ever you talk about the past, you always need two actions and a time scale. Two actions is what you have but no time scale.
I had to call my friend(when?) yesterday or last week?
I had to call my friend yesterday but I completely forgot.
Giving the sentence a little more emphasis by using an adverb (completely).
This sentence is right.I see no problem with this.
"i had to call my friend" this sentence alone can not express whether you called your friend or not but it shows that you were in urgent need or situation.
but when you added "but i forgot" then you are assuring that you didn't call your friend.
Instead of but i forgot you could have also used ,"i had forgotten".
I was reading about this online recently and someone said that their dictionary from 1982 shows the verb "can" as an auxiliary intransitive verb, which was fully congugated and the past and conditional tenses were "could" and the conditional past was "could have". Please could you tell me when the fully conjugated verb became obsolete and was replaced with the two modal verbs "can" and "could" and also why this happened? Thank you for your help!
Hi helenaw,
It's an interesting question, but one that is outside what we do on this site, which is focused on learning English as a foreign/second/additional language. For what it's worth, I'm not sure we can say "can" has ever been fully conjugated in modern English, as to my knowledge it's never had a past participle. But users of sites such as Stack Exchange may be able to shed more light on this. I hope you can find answers there to your interesting question!
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
I have always wondered why WILL, SHALL and WOULD are considered modal verbs as they don't have meaning and they are closer to the auxiliaries DO; DOES; DID
Hi MRamos2022,
It's an interesting question. A modal verb, as defined by the Cambridge Dictionary, is "a verb used with another verb to express an idea such as possibility that is not expressed by the main verb". Will, shall and would fit this description - they are all used with another verb and cannot be used alone, and they express some kind of meaning or attitude that modifies the main verb (broadly speaking, will and shall are about willingness or beliefs about the future, and would is about unreal and hypothetical actions). For example, I like coffee is different in meaning from I would like a coffee, and I don't agree is not the same as I wouldn't agree (using "would" makes it a hypothetical disagreement, thus less direct and possibly more polite).
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Dear respected team,
Even superman wouldn't be able to defeat him.
What does "would" refer to? Does it refer to possibility or point of view of the speaker?
Thank you
Hi Hosseinpour,
"Would" indicates an unreal situation. It is unreal either because Superman is a fictional character and doesn't exist in the real world, or (if this sentence comes from a story in which Superman does exist) because in the speaker's view, Superman and the other person have not yet had a fight and are not really going to fight.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Thank you sir for the help and time.
Thank you
This is very helpful! Thanks
Hello, I have more questions about texts from the 19th century. The text is "Mrs Hutchinson" by Nathaniel Hawthorne. My first question is about the meaning of a question appears in the subjunctive mode in the text. The author writes, "Is the prize worth her [woman's] having if she win it [fame]?" I understand "if she win it" to mean "should she win it", which in turn means that the author has doubts about "her winning it". Therefore, is it correct to conclude that Hawthorne in using the subjunctive mode is expressing a disparaging view about a woman's potential. Isn't he saying "I don't think women can win it".
The other question is from the same document, but comes from the opening statement. "The character of this female suggests a train of thoughts which will form as natural an introduction to her story as most of the prefaces to Gay's Fables or the tales of Prior, besides that the general soundness of the moral may excuse any want to present applicability". I am not sure what the author means by the second half of this sentence (after "besides"). Does he mean "in addition to that the validity of the moral point we gather from Hutchinson's character allows for an introduction here"? I interpreted "want for" to mean "preference for", not as "lack of". I am not sure how "lack of" can work in this case.
I hope that my questions don't bore you.
thanks
Hello Ahmed,
I should start off by saying that I'm not familiar with this text or the context in which the sentences you ask about occur. So please know that my answers might well be different if I were.
Re: your first question, I think that 'should she win it' is a good gloss of 'if she win it'. You could also say 'if she wins it'. I'd have to have a closer look at the text (or be more familiar with 19th-century American literature than I am) to say for sure, but I don't think the subjunctive here indicates any extra meaning. In other words, from this sentence alone, I don't think one can conclude that Hawthorne has doubts about this woman's (or women's?) ability to win fame. I think he's simply saying that she/they might win it, or she/they might not. And really what he seems to be doing isn't so much doubting whether this woman/women can win it, but whether winning fame is something worth winning.
Re: your second question, I'm afraid I'd need to know more about what's Hawthorne's talking about (the woman, her story, her train of thoughts, the moral, etc.) to make any useful sense of this sentence. Perhaps you have a teacher you could ask about this?
All the best,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hell,
In reading 19th century prose, I have often come across a strange usage of "would". Take for instance the following sentence: "Even on a small scale, how often will it happen that the term best corresponding to a new world in the original will be one that in our language is already old and worn out, so that the translator, would he show the work's contribution to the development of the language, will be forced to introduce foreign content into the passage, deviating into the realm of imitation!" Am I right to think of "would he show" to mean "if he wants to show"? Also, under what subtopic in modals can I find more about this usage?
Hi Ahmed Nidal,
Yes, that's right. The meaning of "would" here is the desire to do something, and this meaning is rarely used today. The conditional meaning ("if") comes from the subject/modal inversion, rather than from "would".
It is meaning 2.8 on this Wiktionary page. I hope that helps.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Thank you Jonathan. Much appreciated.
Ahmed
Hello Sir,
"We may have to live with the coronavirus."
1. In this sentence 'have' is main verb or it is modal verb(have to)
2. Can we place two modal verbs (may & have to) together
3. Further, 'to' is attached to 'have'(have to) or it is attached to 'live'(to live)
Hello Mordhvaj,
The main verb in this sentence is 'live'.
'May' is a modal verb. 'Have to' is sometimes called a semi-modal verb in that it has some elements of modality but not others. The wikipedia page for modal verbs describes it thus:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_verb
It is possible to use a modal verb before 'have to', but it is not possible to use 'have to' before a modal verb. Thus, 'we may have to...' is fine, but *'we have to may...'* is incorrect.
We describe the form as have to + verb rather than have + to verb. The 'to' is still included when the verb is omitted:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Sir,
I feel honoured to have my question answered by you. Point by point you have cleared each and every doubt of mine.
I have always been a big fan of your answers. It is almost a miracle to have one's answer 'succinct' and 'detailed' simultaneously; and you are a wizard who can do that miracle.
Thanks🌹
Hello Mordhvaj,
It's nice of you to say so. We're a small team here but we try our best!
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello, thanks for the grammar. I have a question in relation to adverbs of frequency, and modal verbs. These two sentences:
They could never divide us.
They never could divide us.
Which one is grammatically correct? Also are there some situations you could use the second one, and it would be correct? Thanks.
Hi Howard Manzi,
Thanks for your question :) They are both grammatically correct. The typical position is as in sentence 1, between the modal verb and the main verb. Sentence 2 is grammatical too, but the position of "never" seems to make it more emphatic than in sentence 1. Somebody may say this if they really want to emphasise "never".
"Never" can also be emphasised by putting it as the first word in the sentence (this also needs an inversion of subject and modal verb): Never could they divide us.
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Thanks. I appreciate it.
Hello,
"May" has PERMISSION meaning also "Might" has?
I found this following question on this web page.
->I know you're busy, but MIGHT I ask you a quick question?
(and right answer of meaning is PERMISSION)
I understood that "MIGHT" doesn't have PERMISSION meaning. So I am confused..
Thank you.
Hello Jiwon LEE,
As is explained on our 'may' and 'might' page, 'might' can be used to ask for permission in a very polite way.
This use is quite rare in ordinary speaking and many grammars don't even mention it. 'may' and 'can' are far more commonly used.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Jonathan,
I would like to ask for your help and hope you're available to answer me this time.
If someone gives me a present,
I might say :
(A) How could you have known it was my birthday today ?
[1] Does the use of "could have known" in this sentence express surprise about how he could know that today is my birthday ? Or
[2] Is it a conditional sentence with the implied if clause that is not mentioned ? For example :
(B) How could you have known....if my mother had not told you ?
(No surprise is conveyed here)
[3] If we can use this pattern to express surprise, can we say this sentence ?
(C) I don't know how the thief could have known the key code, but he did (= I'm surprised how he got to know the key code).
[4] To express surprise in examples (A) and (C), can we change "could have" to "can have" ?
I would really appreciate your explanation. Thank you.
Best regards,
Hello melvinthio,
(A) is grammatically correct, but in the situation you describe in [1], a more natural statement would be 'How did you know it was my birthday today?'. Both (A) and my suggestion could certainly express surprise, though they don't necessarily do so. Even if you thought the gift giver was giving you the present for a different reason, I still don't think they'd use a sentence with 'could have known' here.
Your analysis of (B) in [2] sounds correct to me, though I don't think the grammar tells us anything about surprise. It could express simple curiosity, though it certainly can also be used to express surprise.
Similar to (A), a more natural way of saying (C) is 'I don't know how the thief knew ...' (assuming we can see evidence of the thief knowing this), but (C) is also possible here. I'd understand it to express some degree of surprise, but I don't think it has anything to do with the grammar, but rather the situation.
I think the difference between the two situations is that in (A), we see the action with our own eyes -- we've seen the person giving the gift or somehow know it came from them. In contrast, in (C), we see the result of the thief's actions -- an open safe -- but haven't seen the thief open it. It also more possible for another person to discover our birthday than it is for a thief to open a safe (at least to my mind).
As for [4], no, 'could have' better expresses the idea of an unlikely possibility. Perhaps 'can have' would be possible in some unusual situations, but in most cases and certainly in the way I've imagined them now, it wouldn't work.
Hope this helps.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hii,
I am Manish. One of my teachers told me modal are ( be and Have ) Be has 3 forms BE =1. Is/am/ are
2. Was/ were
3. Been
You are a teacher.
I am a student.
You were a child 10 years ago.
I was a child too.
Have = possession
I have a car.= I have got a car.
Was he right?
Hello Manish,
Modal verbs are verbs like should, can, could, might, will etc.
'Be' and 'have' are not modal verbs. They are normal verbs but can also be used as auxiliary verbs to form questions and other forms.
Base form - be ~ have
First form (present) - am/is/are ~ have/has
Second form (past) - was/were ~ had
Third form (past participle) - been ~ had
For possession, have and have got are alternatives.
You can read more about the verb 'be' on this page:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/english-grammar-reference/the-verb-be
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Can I use articles with collective noun ? (a,an,the)
Hi Sagir1,
Yes, you can :) If you have any questions about it, you can post them on our Articles page.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi everyone, is the following sentence correct?
I can English.
When can it be accepted?
Thank you so much!
Hello mivu,
No, I'm afraid 'I can English' is not correct in any context I can think of.
It's possible to say 'I can' or 'I can do' in a short answer, but the direct object of the verb is omitted in short answers.
Hope this helps.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hey there
Well, every modal verb will be followed by another verb, which is missing in that statement. It might be the verb "to speak".
I can SPEAK English.
Hello. I have a question.
Why is WOULD considered a modal verb? As I understand, WOULD has no meaning as the other modals verbs. It has a function, which is to make the sentence conditional. And if it is considered, why the other auxiliaries are not? Thank you very much for your help.
Hello MRamos,
'would' actually has a number of uses beyond its use in second conditional structures -- for example, it can be used to make polite requests, or to talk about frequent past events. In older styles of English, it was also used to express desires, though this is almost never heard these days.
In general, modal verbs add different kinds of meaning to a statement -- for example, certainty, possibility or obligation. I'd suggest having a look at our Modal verbs page, where you can see more on this, and you might also find the Cambridge Dictionary Grammar's page on Modal verbs and modality useful.
Hope this helps.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
I couldn't have explained it better. Amazing!