Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The English modal auxiliary verbs are a subset of the English auxiliary verbs used mostly to express modality, properties such as possibility and obligation. [a] They can most easily be distinguished from other verbs by their defectiveness (they do not have participles or plain forms [b]) and by their lack of the ending ‑(e)s for the third-person singular.
might not might’ve: might have mine’s: mine is mustn’t: must not mustn’t’ve: must not have must’ve: must have ’neath (informal) beneath needn’t: need not nal (informal) and all ne’er (informal) never no one's: no one has / no one is nothing's: nothing has / nothing is o’clock: of the clock o’er: over ol’ old ought’ve ...
For example, the inferred certainty sense of English must developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of should developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of may and can developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are:
Modal auxiliary verbs, such as the English words may, can, must, ought, will, shall, need, dare, might, could, would, and should, are often used to express modality, especially in the Germanic languages. Ability, desirability, permission, obligation, and probability can all be exemplified by the usage of auxiliary modal verbs in English:
The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language provides the following non-exhaustive list of modal adverbs at different levels of strength. [3]Strong: assuredly ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Examples are the English and French conditionals (an analytic construction in English, [c] but inflected verb forms in French), which are morphologically futures-in-the-past, [1] and of which each has thus been referred to as a "so-called conditional" [1] [2] (French: soi-disant conditionnel [3] [4] [5]) in modern and contemporary linguistics ...
For example, it might be metaphysically necessary, as some who advocate physicalism have thought, that all thinking beings have bodies [10] and can experience the passage of time. Saul Kripke has argued that every person necessarily has the parents they do have: anyone with different parents would not be the same person.