Talking about modals2
Here is the second set of modals.
These modals express degrees of logical force or social expectation.
Must, had better, should, ought to.
Note that none of them has a past tense or weakened form.
The first one "must" indicates logical or social necessity.
It expresses the strongest logical or social force.
The models "should" and "ought to " assert that something is probable or expected but not necessary.
The modal " had better " expressed advisability.
In other words, if someone "had better" do something, they should do it or there maybe negative consequences.
Therefore, “had better" has the feeling of threat, as in " You had better be there."
This isn't the same as " you should do it", which means you are expected to do it, but without an implied threat if you don't.
Which modal has the feeling of implied threat?---had better
If is greater than B, and B is greater than or equal to C, then?
One interesting rule is that no more than one modal can be used with any verb.
There are no exceptions to this role.
Therefore, it's incorrect to say " He will must be there."
To avoid breaking this rule, there are other words that have the same meaning, but are not modals.
In the case of "Must", for example, we use " have to " as in " He will have to be there."
Similarly, we cannot say " He may can come."
Instead, we say " He may be able to come."
Which expression has the same meaning as " can ", but isn't a modal?-- Be able to.
(排序）：
1.One interesting rule is that no more that one modal can be used with any verb.
2.There are no exceptions to this rule.
3.To avoid breaking this rule, there are other words that have the same meaning, but are not modals.
4. In the case of " must ". for example, we use " have to " as in" He will have to be better."
5. Similarly, we cannot say " He may can come."
6. Instead, we say " He may be able to come."
One last thing to note about modals.
They use the same form regardless of what the subject is.
If the grammatical subject is I, it, we or they, we use the same form, will.
We would never say " He wills be there."
But with non-modal forms, such as " have to" we must change the form to match the subject.
"He has to be there" and " I have to be there."
The modal "may" shows that the speaker thinks something is possible.
Tom must be taller than Sue because he's taller than Ben and Ben is taller than Sue.
The expression "be able to"has the same meaning as "can", but isn't a modal.
The modal "could" expresses less potential than "can", and is often used in conditionals.
网友评论