Is could the past tense of can?

shuntang · Post by **shuntang** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 2:34 pm

Metal56,

You wrote:Shun wrote:

Shun wrote:Tell me if I have misunderstood. But it seems way out of the theme.
It clearly showed the use of can for possibilty as referring to general actions, states or generic qualities. I felt it to be a useful contribution.

Anyway, what is the theme you see here?

As you are now talking about possibilty, you are correct. But where did you say that? Where is your example? Which example you are talking about? I was quoting examples without referring to possibilty, so the explanation is way out of the theme of CAN and COULD:

She can be working after nine o-'clock. means that some days she works after nine o'clock.
She could be working after nine o'clock tonight. is referring to one specific occasion.

So where is your example mentioning possibilty?

Shun

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 3:21 pm

Shun

What is can here:

She can be working after nine o-'clock. means that some days she works after nine o'clock.

Is it:

It is possible for her to be obliged/asked to work after nine.
or

She often chooses to work after nine and you will possibly find her doing so.

Or is it either?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 3:49 pm

2. If today is Tuesday and the sky is now so cloudy that Tom predicts it CAN rain tonight, it is a possibility.
**************
This sounds awkard. What do you think of this example for "can" indicating possibility:
"Driving drunk can be dangerous."

You failed to say why it is awkard.

Examples of recurrent possibilty expressed by can:

It is true that it can rain any time of the year in our country.

"It can rain two inches in Middleton centre, but
not at the airport ,"

During the rainy season it can rain every day and there is the chance
of hurricanes and other natural disasters.

Those clearly show the use of can as possibility. But they also show propensity (a disposition to behave in a certain way). Statements about uncontrollable disposition (e.g. Weather) use could and not can. Why? Well.

A: I assert that it can rain tonight.

B: (Sarcastically) Yes, God.
-------------------------------------
A: It can rain so heavily at times.

B: Yes, it’s happened before and can/could again.

So the answer to the theme question is, “NO!”. Could is not THE past of can. They are both used to HELP indicate past from future reference and many other things.

This is also interesting:

"In future," said Jules, stoutly, "it can rain sulphur or blood; if any one is afraid, it will not be I."

Can there means “For all I care ,..” and “Figuratively speaking, I allow it to rain”.

shuntang · Post by **shuntang** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 4:05 pm

metal56 wrote:Shun

What is can here:

She can be working after nine o-'clock. means that some days she works after nine o'clock.

Is it:

It is possible for her to be obliged/asked to work after nine.
or

She often chooses to work after nine and you will possibly find her doing so.

Or is it either?

My reply: It can be neither of them. “She can be working after nine o-'clock” can mean she is able [=ability] to work after nine. Whether tonight or some other time shall depend on the paragraph of sentences. CAN denotes ability, and if not, it denotes possibility -- this is what I said.

By the way, don’t expect me to decide which one possibility is certain. Both of your possibilities are possible.

Shun

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 4:14 pm

This is all very literary, but don't any of you agree that in ordinary plain English, "can" can only be used to talk about potential and prediction if followed by a link verb.

Did no one read my earlier post?

shuntang · Post by **shuntang** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 4:22 pm

Metal56 wrote:A: It can rain so heavily at times.

B: Yes, it’s happened before and can/could again.

So the answer to the theme question is, “NO!”. Could is not THE past of can. They are both used to HELP indicate past from future reference and many other things.

Metal56, I am afraid we cannot conclude the whole thing based only on your own selected examples.

My own example is, as now I can drink two cups of wine, next week if we refer to this case, we will say "Last Monday Shun could drink two cups of wine". It is not possibility. Could is THE past of can".

Shun

shuntang · Post by **shuntang** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 4:35 pm

Andrew Patterson wrote:This is all very literary, but don't any of you agree that in ordinary plain English, "can" can only be used to talk about potential and prediction if followed by a link verb.

Did no one read my earlier post?

I guess it is very simple. If we go against your only, you can tell us where we are wrong. If we don't go against your only, we have already agreed with you.

Shun

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 5:26 pm

This is all very literary, but don't any of you agree that in ordinary plain English, "can" can only be used to talk about potential and prediction if followed by a link verb.

No

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:06 pm

OK, then answer this. Which would you be more likely to say (assuming you're not just being bloody-minded, and I'll assume this because you're all reasonable people):

a) It can often rain at this time of year.
b) It can be very wet at this time of year.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:32 pm

[

My reply: It can be neither of them. “She can be working after nine o-'clock” can mean she is able [=ability] to work after nine.

I'm afraid I don't agree. "Can work" is possible as ability, but not "can be working".

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:40 pm

Metal56, I am afraid we cannot conclude the whole thing based only on your own selected examples.

And we can on yours?

My own example is, as now I can drink two cups of wine, next week if we refer to this case, we will say "Last Monday Shun could drink two cups of wine". It is not possibility. Could is THE past of can".

Get it straight:

Could is sometimes used as the past of can but DOES NOT only appear in that function.

If you get the basic sematic meaning of can vs could and stop faffing around in the mire of tense, you will be able to use it as it should be used.

Can = I assert that it is possible that...

Could = I assert that it is remotely possible that...

By the way, ability comes under possibilty.

shuntang · Post by **shuntang** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 8:07 pm

Metal56,

You wrote:
Shun wrote:My reply: It can be neither of them. “She can be working after nine o-'clock” can mean she is able [=ability] to work after nine.
I'm afraid I don't agree. "Can work" is possible as ability, but not "can be working".

However, as I have explained in "Highly Selected Examples", Progressives are only aspects, and they are interchangeable with Simple Present. If you don't believe me, please see the following statements from some persons here:

Metal56 wrote:What is can here:
She can be working after nine o-'clock. means that some days she works after nine o'clock.
Is it:
It is possible for her to be obliged/asked to work after nine.
or
She often chooses to work after nine and you will possibly find her doing so.
Or is it either?

Didn't people use works, to work to refer to the original Progressive be working? Did we jump up and protest? Actually, they can at any time retake the Progressive forms, to be more accurate.

Nevertheless, even your opinion is correct and predominant, my suggestion is still valid: CAN denotes ability, and if not, it denotes possibility -- this is what I said.
======================

Metal56,

You wrote:
Shun wrote:Metal56, I am afraid we cannot conclude the whole thing based only on your own selected examples.
And we can on yours?

But you could not produce examples to disprove me, as I did you.

===========

You wrote: Could is sometimes used as the past of can but DOES NOT only appear in that function.

I am quite happy that, after my explanation, now you can accept this. It is a lot better to bluntly say this:

Metal56 wrote:So the answer to the theme question is, “NO!”. Could is not THE past of can.

Now we have a lot in common about modal verbs.
===========

Metal56 concluded and wrote:By the way, ability comes under possibilty.

Please update the information: it isn't when referring to the past. "Last Monday Shun could drink two cups of wine" -- could doesn't come under possibility.

Shun Tang

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:37 pm

It can rain a lot at this time of year.
It often rains at this time of year.
It can be very wet at this time of year.

are all linguistucally possible. The choice depends on the climate.

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:42 pm

Can = I assert that it is possible that...

Could = I assert that it is remotely possible that...

By the way, ability comes under possibilty.

You're being just as dogmatic as Shuntang, and just as wrong.

Remoteness has nothing to do with some of the distinctions between can and could that we are talking about here.

And ability only comes under possiblity if you want to construct imaginary hierarchies.

'Can' comes from the Old English 'kennen' meaning to know, or to know how to. The idea of ability derives from that primary meaning, and only in some imaginary thesis is ability subservient to possibility.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 10:08 pm

Please update the information: it isn't when referring to the past. "Last Monday Shun could drink two cups of wine" -- could doesn't come under possibility.

Shun Tang

You are certainly one of the most all-over-the-place debaters I've ever come across on a forum . I don't even understand half of your threads.