As for the past tense "could," grammar books warn learners of English against using it for something that was successful only once.
So I don't think you will accept (1), which is an example cited from a dictionary issued in Japan that is most popular.
(1) *I could pass my driving test.
What about, however, if we add some adverbial?
(2) Only yesterday I could pass my driving test.
(3) I could pass my driving test at last.
Do you accept them?
Thank you in advance
Seiichi MYOGA
Of course, "only yesterday" may induce inversion if the negation is over a sentence.
(4) Only yesterday could I pass my driving test. (=I couldn't pass my driving test until yesterday).
a one-time successful event
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Re: a one-time successful event
I would interpret sentence 2 as "I could, but I chose not to."(1) *I could pass my driving test.
What about, however, if we add some adverbial?
(2) Only yesterday I could pass my driving test.
(3) I could pass my driving test at last.
Hi!
I find all of these sentences unacceptable. However, No.2 may be OK if you use "by yesterday": I took so many lessons that by yesterday I could pass my driving test (although I prefer "could have passed"). As you are aware, "was able" in this sentence implies that you in fact took the test and passed.
You can possibly get away with "until"-sentences like:
I had to practise and practise until I could pass my driving test.
It was not until yesterday that I could pass my driving test.
But I still prefer the "was able" form.
Harzer
I find all of these sentences unacceptable. However, No.2 may be OK if you use "by yesterday": I took so many lessons that by yesterday I could pass my driving test (although I prefer "could have passed"). As you are aware, "was able" in this sentence implies that you in fact took the test and passed.
You can possibly get away with "until"-sentences like:
I had to practise and practise until I could pass my driving test.
It was not until yesterday that I could pass my driving test.
But I still prefer the "was able" form.
Harzer
-
Seiichi MYOGA
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 6:13 am
Dear metal56 and Harzer,
I appreciate your help and comments.
Some native speakers of English (ENL) accept (4).
(4) I could find some keys easily yesterday.
I suppose the contrastive stress falls on "yesterday" and (4) may imply (5).
(5) Yesterday I could but today I could not.
But this "could" seems to enjoy improved acceptability, as Harzer suggests, when it appears in an embedded, or smaller clause.
I have three questions here.
Q1: This is about metal56's interesting comments (quoted as (6)).
(6) I would interpret sentence 2 as "I could, but I chose not to."
My interpretation was ..."I could have (passed my driving test), but I chose not to." And then I came across Harzer's comments.
(7) I took so many lessons that by yesterday I could pass my driving test (although I prefer "could have passed").
Can we understand that you may sometimes use "could +do" as a substitute for "could +have+ done"?
Q2 My second question is about "was able" in this sentence implies that you in fact took the test and passed.
I suppose ENL understand the "until" clause in (8a) and the "so that"-clause in (9a) mean something that has resulted from the prerequisite condition stated in the main clause having been met; "I had to practise and practise" suggests "I actually practised and practised because I had to." In other words, the "could" is inteded to mean the realization of something, roughly corresponding to "succeeded in."
(8] a. I had to practise and practise until I could pass my driving test.
b. I had to practise and pracise and at last I [could pass/succeeded in passing] my driving test.
(9) a. I had to [practise and practise/practise hard] so that I could pass my driving test.
b. I had to [practise and practise/practise hard], so I [could pass/succeeded in passing] my driving test.
If you allow me to rephrase it, do you think (8a) and (9a) impy (8b) and (9b) respectively?
My final question is about "It was not until yesterday that I could pass my driving test."
Do you accept (10)?
(10) I could pass my driving test, but not until yesterday.
Thank you for your being with me so far, patiently.
Seiichi MYOGA
I appreciate your help and comments.
Some native speakers of English (ENL) accept (4).
(4) I could find some keys easily yesterday.
I suppose the contrastive stress falls on "yesterday" and (4) may imply (5).
(5) Yesterday I could but today I could not.
But this "could" seems to enjoy improved acceptability, as Harzer suggests, when it appears in an embedded, or smaller clause.
I have three questions here.
Q1: This is about metal56's interesting comments (quoted as (6)).
(6) I would interpret sentence 2 as "I could, but I chose not to."
My interpretation was ..."I could have (passed my driving test), but I chose not to." And then I came across Harzer's comments.
(7) I took so many lessons that by yesterday I could pass my driving test (although I prefer "could have passed").
Can we understand that you may sometimes use "could +do" as a substitute for "could +have+ done"?
Q2 My second question is about "was able" in this sentence implies that you in fact took the test and passed.
I suppose ENL understand the "until" clause in (8a) and the "so that"-clause in (9a) mean something that has resulted from the prerequisite condition stated in the main clause having been met; "I had to practise and practise" suggests "I actually practised and practised because I had to." In other words, the "could" is inteded to mean the realization of something, roughly corresponding to "succeeded in."
(8] a. I had to practise and practise until I could pass my driving test.
b. I had to practise and pracise and at last I [could pass/succeeded in passing] my driving test.
(9) a. I had to [practise and practise/practise hard] so that I could pass my driving test.
b. I had to [practise and practise/practise hard], so I [could pass/succeeded in passing] my driving test.
If you allow me to rephrase it, do you think (8a) and (9a) impy (8b) and (9b) respectively?
My final question is about "It was not until yesterday that I could pass my driving test."
Do you accept (10)?
(10) I could pass my driving test, but not until yesterday.
Thank you for your being with me so far, patiently.
Seiichi MYOGA
I am one native speaker who does not accept (4).
Somewhat better is the use of Subject- Verb inversion: but Spellchecker will not let me type the sentence containing that inversion!!!!!
So, you have to imagine that sentence written with inversion. The problem with this is that it is saying that yesterday was the only time that I could pass the test. Whereas you want say that, although yesterday was the first time I did it, I can now do it on demand.
Therefore I suggest: Not until yesterday could I pass/was I able to pass/did I succeed in passing my test, which, lo and behold, is accepted by Spellchecker.
I don't like "I could pass" as a substitute for "I could have passed", but I have to concede that in contemporary colloquial speech there is a strong tendency to make this substitution, especially in if-sentences.
I guess (10) is OK - but there is always a clash between the various meanings of "could" that make one (i.e. me) prefer "succeeded in + -ing" or "was able to + infinitive", which are unambiguous.
Harzer[/b]
Somewhat better is the use of Subject- Verb inversion: but Spellchecker will not let me type the sentence containing that inversion!!!!!
So, you have to imagine that sentence written with inversion. The problem with this is that it is saying that yesterday was the only time that I could pass the test. Whereas you want say that, although yesterday was the first time I did it, I can now do it on demand.
Therefore I suggest: Not until yesterday could I pass/was I able to pass/did I succeed in passing my test, which, lo and behold, is accepted by Spellchecker.
I don't like "I could pass" as a substitute for "I could have passed", but I have to concede that in contemporary colloquial speech there is a strong tendency to make this substitution, especially in if-sentences.
I guess (10) is OK - but there is always a clash between the various meanings of "could" that make one (i.e. me) prefer "succeeded in + -ing" or "was able to + infinitive", which are unambiguous.
Harzer[/b]