Modal verbs

The Prime Minister is to go to Paris next week. (Daily Worker, London)

In this meaning to be to is found is affirmative and negative sentences and followed by the simple infinitive.

something that is destined to happen

E.g. He was to be my teacher and friend for many years to come.

He did not know at the time that he was never to see his native place again.

How was I to know that I was going to meet a raging beauty?

It has been a great blow to me that you haven't been able to follow me in my business as I followed by father. Three generations, that would have been. But it wasn't to be.

This meaning of to be to is rendered in Russian as суждено. It is mainly found in the past tense and its application is limited to narration. It occurs in affirmative and negative sentences and is followed by the simple infinitive.

Possibility

E.g. Her father was often to be seen in the bar of the Hotel Metropole.

Where is he to be found?

Nothing was to be done under the circumstances.

Responsibilities and obligations possessed by the Soviet trade unions are to be envied. (Morning Star)

In this meaning to be to is equivalent to can or may. It is used in all kinds of sentences in the present and past tenses and is followed by the passive infinitive.

Here are some examples taken from the literary works:

`Tell him to go to sleep'. - `She says you're to go to sleep'. (D.H. Lawrence).

I could scarcely see her in the darkness, but when I rose to go - it was plain that I was not to linger - she stood in the orange light from the doorway. (F Scott Fitzgerald)

Must, to have to and to be to Compared.

The verbs must, to have to and to be to have one meaning in common, that of obligation. In the present tense the verbs come very close to each other in their use, though they preserve their specific shades of meaning. Thus must indicates obligation or necessity from the speaker's viewpoint, i.e. it expresses obligation imposed by the speaker.

E.g. I must do it. (I want to do it).

He must do it himself.

To have to expresses obligation or necessity imposed by circumstances.

E.g. What a pity you have to go now (It is time for you to catch you train).

He has to do it himself. (He has got no one to help him).

To be to expresses obligation or necessity resulting from an arrangement.

E.g. We are to wait for them at the entrance. (We have arranged to meet there, so we must wait form them at the appointed place).

Sometimes the idea of obligation is absent and to be to expresses only a previously arranged plan.

E.g. We are to go the cinema tonight.

In the past tense, however, the difference in the use of the three verbs is quite considerable.

Must has no past tense. It is used in past-time contexts only in reported speech.

E.g. He said he must do it himself.

Had to + infinitive is generally used to denote an action which was realized in the past as a result of obligation or necessity imposed by circumstance.

E.g. I had to sell my car. (It was necessary for me to do it because I needed money).

He had to put on his raincoat. (It was raining hard outside and he would have got wet if he had not).

Was (were) to + infinitive is used to denote an action planned for the future which is viewed from the past. The action was no realized in the past and the question remains open as to whether it is going to take place.

E.g. We were to meet him at the station. (It is not clear from the sentence if the action will take place).

If the speaker wishes to make it clear at once that the plan was not fulfilled, the Perfect infinitive is used to show that.

E.g. We were to have met him t the station. (That means that we failed to meet him). However, the simple infinitive may also be used in this case.

In reported speech (in past-time contexts) must remains unchanged in all of its meanings.

E.g. He said he must do it without delay.

He said I mustn't tell anyone about it.

The doctor told her that she must eat.

They believed the story must be true.

Parallel to must, had to + infinitive is also used occasionally in reported speech to express obligation.

E.g. He said he had to make a telephone call at once.

In this case had to is close to must in meaning: it does not include the idea of a realized action but refers to some future moment.

Ought to

The modal verb ought to has only one form which is used “with reference to the present of future. In reported speech it remains unchanged. Ought is always followed by the infinitive with to.

Ought to has the following meanings:

obligation, which in different contexts may acquire additional shades of meaning, such as advisability and desirability,

E.g. You ought to say a word or two about yourself.

Ought she to warn him?

He oughtn't to mention it to anybody.

“It doesn't mean you ought to marry a Yankee.” He persisted.(F. Scott Fitzgerald)

In this meaning ought to is possible in all kinds of sentences, though it is felt to be awkward in questions where should is preferred.

Generally ought to refers an action to the future and is followed by the simple infinitive. With reference to the present ought to is used with the continuous infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.

E.g. At your age you ought to be earning your living.

You ought to feel some respect for your elders.

It was getting darker and darker - all those tomb-stones ought to be repainted, sure enough, only that would spoil them, of course. (F. Scott Fitzgerald).

“If you care for him you certainly oughtn't to belittle yourself in front of him,” said Ailie in a flash, her head high. (F. Scott Fitzgerald)

In combination with the perfect infinitive ought to in the affirmative form shows that a desirable action was no fulfilled.

E.g. You ought to have chosen a more suitable time to tell me this news.

In the negative form ought to in combination with the Perfect Infinitive shows that an undesirable action was fulfilled

E.g. I'm sorry. I ought to have said it.

You oughtn't to have married her, David. It was a great mistake.

supposition implying strong probability.

E.g. Oughtn't you to go and have your tiffin?

The of ought to in this case is not very common as this meaning is normally rendered by must: He/You ought to know it (=he is/you are supposed to know it). You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Shall and should

Historically, shall and should were two forms of the same verb expressing obligation. She was the present tense of the Indicative Mood; should was the Subjunctive Mood. But later they came to express different meanings and in present-day English their use is not parallel - they are treated as two different verbs.

Shall

In modern English the modal meaning of obligation in shall is always combined with the function of an auxiliary verb of the future tense.

Shall is still used to express obligation with the second and third persons, but at present it is not common in this meaning in spoken English. Its use, as a rule, is restricted to formal or even archaic style and mainly found in subordinate clauses, i.e. it is structurally dependent.

E.g. It has been decided that the proposal shall not be opposed.

This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade, be lent, resold, hired out or otherwise disposed of without the publisher's consent.

At present, however, this meaning of obligation, somewhat modified, is found with the second and third persons in sentences expressing promise, threat or warning. It is used in affirmative and negative sentences and combined with the simple infinitive.

E.g. You shall have my answer tomorrow.

“You shall stay just where you are!” his mother cried angrily

He shall do as I say.

The meaning of obligation may also be traced in interrogative sentences where shall is used with the first and third persons to ask after the will of the person addressed. In this case it is also followed by the simple infinitive.

E.g. Shall I get you some fresh coffee, Miss Flour?

Who shall answer the telephone, Major?

Sentences of this kind are usually rendered in Russian with the help of the infinitive: Принести Вам ещё кофе? Кому отвечать по телефону? etc.

Should

In modern English the modal verb should is used with reference to the present or future. It remains unchanged in reported speech.

Should has the following meanings:

obligation, which in different contexts may acquire additional shades of meaning, such as advisability and desirability,

E.g. It's late. You should go to bed.

You shouldn't miss the opportunity.

Should I talk to him about it?

He said that the status of the Greek minority should be viewed in the light of political balance. (Moscow news)

He said that this was not a temporary problem. Lasting arrangements should be made. (W. Faulkner)

Should in this meaning is found in all kinds of sentences. Like ought to it generally refers an action to the future and followed by the simple infinitive.

With reference to the resent should is used with the Continuous Infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.

E.g. You shouldn't be sitting in home. Move out of it into the garden.

You shouldn't feel so unhappy over such trifles.

Should may be combined with the Perfect Infinitive. In this case the meaning of the combination depends on whether the sentence is affirmative or negative. In an affirmative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive indicates that a desirable action was not carried out.

E.g. He looks very ill. He should have stayed at home.

He should have told me about it himself.

In a negative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive serves to show that an undesirable action was carried out.

E.g. Oh, John, you shouldn't have done as you did.

They shouldn't have concealed it from us.

supposition implying strong probability,

E.g. The film should be very good as it is starring first-class actors.

The use of should in this case does not seem to be very common as this meaning is usually rendered by must.

In addition to the above mentioned cases showing the independent use of should this verb occurs in certain object clauses where it depends on the lexical character of the predicate verb in the principal clause and in adverbial clauses of condition, purpose and concession.

E.g. I suggest hat you should stay here as if nothing had happened.

“It's important,” I broke out, “that the people should know what we've just heard.”

She was terrified lest they should goon talking about her.

Should may have a peculiar function - it may be used for emotional coloring. In this function it may be called the emotional should. The use of the emotional should is structurally dependent.

It is found in the following cases:

In special emphatic constructions where a simple predicate is not used:

in rhetorical questions beginning with why,

E.g. Why should I do it? (С какой стати я буду это делать?)

Why shouldn't you invite him? (Почему бы Вам его не пригласить?)

in object clauses beginning with why,

E.g. I don't know why he should want to see him (Я не знаю зачем он ему нужен)

I don't see why we shouldn't make friends.

in attributive clauses beginning with why after the noun reason,

E.g. There is no reason why they shouldn't get on very well together (Нет причины почему бы им не ладить дpуг с другом).

in constructions of the following kind,

E.g. The door opened and who should come in but Tom (Дверь открылась, и, кто бы Вы думали, вошёл? Никто иной, как Том)

As I was crossing the street, whom should I meet but Aunt Ann.

in the set phrase How should I know? (Почём я знаю?) In the above cases should may be followed by the Perfect infinitive which in simple sentences refers the action to the past and in complex sentences shows that the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause.

E.g. I went into business with her as her partner. Why shouldn't I have done it? (Почему бы мне не сделать это?)

He didn't know why he should have expected them to look different (Он не знал почему ожидал увидеть их с другими).

In certain types of subordinate clauses where should + infinitive is interchangeable with a simple predicate in the Indicative Mood:

in object clauses after expressions of regret, surprise, sometimes pleasure or displeasure,

E.g. I`m sorry that you should think so badly of me (Мне жаль, что Вы так плохо обо мне думаете).

He was little surprise that Ann should speak so frankly about it.

I'm content that you should think so.

The rules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here. The Perfect infinitive is used to show that the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause.

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5