He couldn't help laughing
/ can't help doing means не могу удержаться от... or не могу
не делать (чего-то).
b) I can't but askhim about it.
They couldn't but refusehim.
/ can't but do something means {мне) ничего другого не оста
ется, как... .
c) Не can't possibly doit.
I couldn't possibly refusehim.
I can't (couldn't) possibly do means просто не могу (не мог)
сделать... .
may
§ 82.The modal verb may has the following forms: may —the
present tense (e.g. It may betrue) and might —the Past tense.
The form might is used in two ways: a) in past-time contexts,
mainly in reported speech in accordance with the rules of the se-
quence of tenses (e.g. He told me that it might be true) and b) in
present-time contexts as a milder and more polite form of may, or
as a form implying more uncertainty than may (e.g. Might I come
and see you? It might be true), or to express unreality (e.g. He
might have fallen ill if he hadn't taken the pills).
§ 83.May has the following meanings:
1) supposition implying uncertainty,
e.g.He may bebusy getting ready for his trip.
In Russian this meaning is generally rendered by means of the
modal adverbs возможно and может быть.
In English this meaning may also be rendered by means of the
attitudinal adverbs perhaps and maybe.
In the meaning of supposition implying uncertainty the verb
may occurs in affirmative and negative sentences.
e.g. He may beat home.
He maynot beat home. (Возможно, что его нет дома. Мо-
жет быть, его нет дома.)
In this meaning may can be followed by different forms of the
infinitive depending on the time reference expressed.
May in combination with the simple infinitive usually refers
the action to the future.
e.g. He may come soon.
The action may also refer to the present but only with stative
verbs.
e.g.He may beill.
He may not knowabout it.
May in combination with the Continuous infinitive of dynamic
Verbs refers the action to the present.
e.g. It's too late to phone him now. He may be sleeping.
I never see him about now. For all I know, he may be writing
a book.
May in combination with the Perfect infinitive refers the ac-
tion to the past.
e.g. He may have fallen ill.
"What's happened to the dog?" I said. "It isn't here. His
master may have taken it with him."
The combination of may with the Perfect infinitive may also
indicate an action begun in the past and continued into the mo-
ment of speaking. This is usually found with stative verbs.
e.g. He may have been at home for about two hours.
However, if may is followed by a dynamic verb, the Perfect
Continuous infinitive is used.
e.g. He may have been waiting for us for an hour.
In the meaning of supposition implying uncertainty, the form
might is also found. It differs from the form may in that it em-
phasizes the idea of uncertainty. It may be followed by the sim-
ple, Continuous or Perfect infinitive.
e.g. He might come soon.
He might be ill.
He might be doing his lessons now.
He might have spoken to her yesterday.
2) possibility due to circumstances,
e.g. You may order a taxi by telephone.
A useful rough-and-ready rule is that time adverbs may come
at either end of the sentence, but not in the middle.
May in this meaning occurs only in affirmative sentences and
is followed only by the simple infinitive.
The form might is used in past-time contexts in accordance
with the rules of the sequence of tenses.
e.g. He said he might order a taxi by telephone.
Might followed by the Perfect infinitive indicates that the ac-
tion was not carried out owing to certain circumstances (ex-
pressed in the sentence or implied).
e.g. He might have fallen ill if he hadn't taken the medicine.
Luckily he wasn't driving the car. He might have been hurt.
You are so careless. You might have broken the cup. (Ты чуть
было не разбил чашку.)
3) permission,
e.g. The director is alone now. So you may see him now.
May in this meaning is found in affirmative sentences, in in-
terrogative sentences which usually express a request, and in nega-
tive sentences where it denotes prohibition. But in negative sen-
tences it is not common as prohibition is generally expressed by
other modal verbs (see can and must).
e.g. You may smoke in here.
May I smoke in here?
You may not smoke in here.
In this meaning may is combined only with the simple infinitive.
In interrogative sentences the form might is also found when
we wish to express a more polite request.
e.g. Might I join you?
In reported speech the form might is used.
e.g. He told me that I might smoke in the room.
He asked me if he might join us.
4) disapproval or reproach,
e.g. You might carry the parcel for me.
You might have helped me.
Here we find only the form might used in affirmative sentenc-
es and followed by the simple or Perfect infinitive. In the latter
case it expresses reproach for the non-performance of an action.
§ 84. The form might which expresses unreality is not always
Parallel to may.
Might expresses unreality only in combination with the Per-
fect infinitive.
e.g. You might have let me know about it beforehand.
There was a car accident in front of our house. Luckily
Tommy was at school. He might have been killed.
In most cases might is used as a milder and more polite form than
may (a) or as a form implying a greater degree of uncertainty (b):
a) permission — May I speak to him now?
Might I speak to him now? (very polite)
b) supposition — He may come a little later.
He might come a little later, (less certain)
The two forms are not opposed in the meaning of possibility
due to circumstances where only may is used, nor in the meaning
of disapproval or reproach where might alone is found.
e.g. You may findthe book at the library.
You might have considered your parents' feelings.
§ 85. Notice the following set phrases with may and might:
a) May as well (might as well, might just as well) + infinitive
is a very mild and unemphatic way of expressing an intention. It is
also used to suggest or recommend an action.
e.g. I may as well take the child with me. (Я, пожалуй, возьму
ребенка с собой. Пожалуй, будет лучше, если я возьму
ребенка с собой.)
You may as well give him the letter.
I might as well stay at home tonight,
"I'llgo at six." "That's far too late; you might just as well
notgo at all." (Можно было бы и не ходить туда совсем.)
b) It might have been worse means 'Things are not so bad after
all.' In Russian it is rendered as: Могло бы быть и хуже or В
конце концов дела обстоят не так уж плохо.
c) Не might have been a... means 'He might have been taken
for a...', 'He looked like a... .'
e.g. Roy Wilson, the new doctor, was twenty-eight, large, heavy
mature and blond. He might have been a Scandinavian sailor-
d) /f / may say so... has become a stereotyped phrase in which
the meaning of permission is considerably weakened.
e.g. If I may say so, I think you have treated him very badly.
§ 86. In addition to the above cases illustrating the independent
use of may, this modal verb occurs in subordinate object clauses
after expressions of fear as well as in adverbial clauses of purpose
and concession. Here it is structurally dependent (for a detailed
treatment of this use of may see "Verbs", §§ 135, 143, 152).
e.g. I fear he may fall ill.
He is coming here so that they may discuss it without delay.
However cold it may be, we'll go skiing.
can and may compared
§ 87.The use of can and may is parallel only in two meanings:
possibility due to circumstances and permission. In these mean-
ings, however, they are not always interchangeable for a number
of various reasons.
1) Thus in the meaning of possibility due to circumstances the
use of may is restricted only to affirmative sentences, whereas can
is found in all kinds of sentences.
May Can
He may findthis book at the He can findthis book at the
library. library.
Can he findthis book at the
library?
He cannot findthis book at the
library.
Their time reference is also different. May refers only to the
Present or future; the form might is used in past-time contexts
only in reported speech. Can (could) may refer to the present,
Past or future.
May Can
He may findthe book at the He can findthe book at the
library. library.
Isaid that he might findthe He could findthe book at the
book at the library. library yesterday.
He can findthe book at the
library tomorrow.
Both could and might combined with the Perfect infinitive in-
dicate that the action was not carried out in the past.
e.g. He might have foundthe book at the library.
He could have foundthe book at the library.
It follows from the above that the sphere of application of can
in this meaning is wider than that of may.
2) When may and can express permission the difference be-
tween them is rather that of style than of meaning — may is more
formal than can which is characteristic of colloquial English.
Cf. May (might) I speakto you for a moment, professor?
Can (could) I havea cup of tea, Mother?
May in negative sentences expressing prohibition is uncommon.
Must
§ 88. The modal verb must has only one form. It is used in
present-time contexts with reference to the present or future and
in combination with the Perfect infinitive it refers to the past. In
past-time contexts this form is used only in reported speech, i.e.
the rules of the sequence of tenses are not observed with must.
§ 89. Must has the following meanings:
1) obligation(from the speaker's point of view),
e.g. You must talkto your daughter about her future.
Musthe doit himself?
In different contexts must may acquire additional shades of
meaning, such as dutyor necessity.
Inthis meaning must is found in affirmative and interrogative
sentences and followed only by the simple infinitive.
Prohibition,
e.g. He must not leavehis room for awhile. (Он не должен/ему
нельзя выходить из комнаты некоторое время.)
This meaning is expressed in negative sentences and must is
also followed by the simple infinitive.
Note, Absence of necessity (in Russian не нужно, нет необходимости) is ex-
pressed by other verbs (see to have and need).
Emphatic advice,
e.g.You must come andsee us when you're in London.
You must stopworrying about your son.
You mustn'tgive another thought to what he said.
You mustn't miss the film. It is very good.
You must have your hair cut. It's much too long.
You mustn't cry.
This meaning is found in affirmative and negative sentences
and is closely connected with the two above mentioned meanings.
4) supposition implying strong probability,
e.g. He must beill. He looks so pale.
It must be late as the streets are deserted.
Must in this meaning is found only in affirmative sentences.
In Russian this meaning is generally rendered by means of the
attitudinal adverbs вероятно, должно быть.
In English this meaning may also be expressed by means of the
attitudinal adverb probably.
In this meaning must may be followed by different forms of
the infinitive. If reference is made to the present, the Continuous
infinitive is used with dynamic verbs.
e-g. The book is not on the shelf. Jane must be readingit.
Let's have something to eat. You must be starving.
Ifmust is followed by the simple infinitive of dynamic verbs,
it expresses obligation.
e-g. Jane must read the book.
You muststay here.
However, with stative verbs the simple infinitive is used to
express supposition.
e.g. He must beover fifty.
He must knowall about it as he has read a lot on the subject.
Must in combination with the Perfect infinitive refers the ac-
tion to the past.
e.g. Do you see him smoking over there? He must have finished
his work.
It is six o'clock. She must have comehome.
The combination of must with the Perfect Continuous infini-
tive indicates an action begun in the past and continued into the
moment of speaking.
e.g. It must have been rainingall the night. There are big pud-
dles in the garden.
However, if must is followed by a stative verb, the Perfect in-
finitive is used.
e.g. He must have beenhere since breakfast.
He must have knownit all along.
Note. Occasionally the combination of must with the Perfect Continuous infini-
tive may express an action going on at a given past moment.
e.g. He must have been writinga letter when I came.
When must expresses supposition implying strong probability,
its use is restricted in two ways:
a) It is not used with reference to the future. In this case we
find attitudinal adverbs in the sentence.
e.g. He will probably cometomorrow.
He will evidently knowall about it.
b) It is not used in the interrogative or negative form. It is
found only in the affirmative form.
Note. To express supposition implying strong probability with negative mean-
ing, in addition to attitudinal adverbs, the following means are employed:
e.g. He must have failedto get in touch with her.
He must have misunderstoodyou.
He must be unawareof that.
He must never have guessedthe truth.
No one must have toldhim about it.
§ 90. Note the following set phrases with must.
a) Must needsdenotes obligation.
e.g. He must needsgo there. (Он непременно должен пойти туда.)
b) / must be going and / must be off both mean 'it is time for
me to go* (in Russian Мне пора уходить).
c) / must tell you that... and / must say... are stereotyped
phrases in which the meaning of obligation is considerably weak-
ened inmust.
d) In the sentences: You must come and see me some time.
You must come and have dinner with me. You must come to our
party. You must come and stay with us for the week end and the
like, the meaning of obligation in must is also weakened. Must
has become part of such sentences which are a common way of ex-
pressing invitations.
must and may Compared
§ 91.Must and мaу can be compared in two meanings:
1) Both may and must serve to express suppositionbut their use
is not parallel. May denotes supposition implying uncertainty where-
as the supposition expressed by must implies strong probability.
Cf. For all I know, he may bean actor. His face seems so familiar.
He must bean actor. His voice carries so well.
I saw him an hour ago. He maystill bein his office now.
He always comes at 10 sharp. So he must bein his office
now.
2) May and must are used to express prohibitionin negative
sentences. But may is seldom found in this meaning. In negative
answers to questions with may asking for permission we generally
find must not or cannot.
e.g. "May I smoke here?" "No, you mustn't(you can't)."
To have to
§ 92. To have to as a modal verb is not a defective verb and
can have all the necessary finite forms as well as the verbals.
e.g. He is an invalid and has to havea nurse.
She knew what she had to do.
I shall have to reconsidermy position.
He is always having to exercisejudgement.
My impression was that he was having to forcehimself to talk.
I have had to remindyou of writing to her all this time.
The women at Barford had had to be toldthat an experiment
was taking place that day.
"As a matter of fact," he said, "I've been having to spend
some time with the research people."
It wouldn't have been very nice for the Davidsons to haveto
mixwith all those people in the smoking-room.
Having to workalone, he wanted all his time for his research.
The interrogative and negative forms of the modal verb to have
to are built up by means of the auxiliary verb to do.1
e.g. Why doI have to doeverything?
Didhe have to tellthem about it?
"That's all right," she said. "I just thought I'd ask. You
don't have to explain."
There was a grin on his face. He did not have to tellme that
he already knew.
§ 93. The verb to have to serves to express obligationor neces-
sityimposed by circumstances. It is rendered in Russian as прихо-
дится, вынужден.
In this meaning it is found in all kinds of sentences — af-
firmative, interrogative and negative — and is combined only
with the simple infinitive.
e.g. He had to doit.
Didhe have to doit?
He did not have to do it.
In negative sentences to have to denotes absence of necessity
(compare with the negative form of must which expresses prohibi-
tion).
1 The interrogative and negative forms of the modal verb to have to built up without
the auxiliary do are uncommon in American English and infrequent in British English-
e.g.You don't have to gothere. (Вам не нужно/нет необходимо-
сти идти гуда.)
You mustn'tgo there. (Вам нельзя идти туда.)
§ 94. In spoken English the meaning of obligation and necessi-
ty is also expressed by have (has) got to. Like the verb to have to,
it is found in all kinds of sentences and is combined with the sim-
ple infinitive.
e.g. He has got to goright now.
Hashe got togo right now?
He hasn'tgot to gojust yet.
This combination may also be found in the past tense, though
it is not very common.
e.g. He had gotto sell his car.
§ 95. Note the set phrase had better.
e.g. A few drops began to fall. "We'd better takeshelter," she
said. (Нам лучше укрыться.)
She didn't like to say that she thought they had better not
play cards when the guest might come in at any moment.
Had better is followed by the infinitive without to.
to be to
§ 96. To be to as a modal verb is used in the present and past
tenses.
e.g.We are to meetat six.
We were to meetat six.
§ 97.To be to as a modal verb has the following meanings:
1) a previously arranged plan or obligationresulting from the
arrangement,
e-g. We areto discuss it next time.
We were to discuss it the following week.
Is he to arrive tomorrow?
Who was tospeak at the meeting?
This meaning of to be to is found in affirmative and interro-
gative sentences in the present and past tenses. To be to is fol-
lowed by the simple infinitive.
The past tense of the verb to be to in combination with the
Perfect infinitive denotes an unfulfilled plan.
e.g. I promised to go to a club with her last Tuesday, and I really
forgot all about it. We were to have played a duet together.
2) orders and instructions, often official (frequently in report-
ed speech),
e.g. I just mention it because you said I was to give you all the
details I could.
Norman says I am to leave you alone.
All junior officers are to report to the colonel at once.
In this meaning to be to is found in affirmative and negative
sentences and followed by the simple infinitive.
3) 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 na-
tive place again.
It's been a great blow to me that you haven't been able to
follow me in my business as I followed my 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.
4) possibility,
e.g. Her father was often to be seen in the bar of the Hotel Metro
pole.
Where is he to be found?
Nothing was to be done under the circumstances.
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 fol'
lowed by the passive infinitive.
§ 98. Note the following set phrases with the modal verb to be to:
What am I to do? (Что мне делать? Как мне быть?)
What is to become of me? (Что со мной станется? Что со
мной будет?)
Where am I to go? (Куда же мне идти? Куда же мне деваться?)
§ 99. То be to in the form of were to + infinitive for all per-
sons is found in conditional clauses where it is structurally depen-
dent (for a detailed treatment of this use of the verb to be to see
"Verbs", § 149).
e.g. If he were to come again I should not receive him.
musty to have to andto be to Compared
§ 100.The verbs must, to have to and to be to have one mean-
ing 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 obliga-
tion imposed by the speaker.
e.g. I must do it. (/ want to do it.)
He must do it himself. (7 shan't help him.)
To have to expresses obligation or necessity imposed by circum-
stances.
e.g. What a pity you have to go now. (It's time for you to catch
your 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 for them at the appointed
place.)
Sometimes the idea of obligation is absent and to be to ex-
presses only a previously arranged plan.
e-g. We are to go to the cinema tonight.
Note. In public notices we find must because they express obligation imposed
by some authorities.
e.g. Passengers mustcross the railway line by the foot bridge.
The same is true of prohibition expressed in negative sentences,
e.g. Passengers must not walkacross the railway line.
Visitors must not feedthe animals.
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 doit himself.
Had to + infinitive is generally used to denote an action which
was realized in the past as a result of obligation or necessity im-
posed by circumstances,
e.g. I had to sellmy car. (It was necessary for me to do it because
I needed money.)
He had to put onhis raincoat. (It was raining hard out side
and he would have got wet if he hadn't.)
Was (were) to + infinitive is used to denote an action planned
for the future which is viewed from the past. The action was not
realized in the past and the question remains open as to whether it
is going to take place.
e.g. We were tomeet 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 havemet him at the station. (That means that
we failed to meet him.)
However, the simple infinitive may also be used in this case.
§ 101.In reported speech (in past-time contexts) must remains
unchanged in all of its meanings.
e.g. He said he must doit without delay.
He said I mustn't tellanyone about it.
The doctor told her that she must eat.
They believed the story must betrue.
Parallel to must, had to + infinitive is also used occasionally
reported speech to express obligation.
. He said he had to makea telephone call at once.
In this case had to is close to must in meaning: it does not in-
clude the idea of a realized action but refers to some future moment.
Note. Care should be taken not to replace must by had to in reported speech as
two verbs express different meanings (see above).
ought to
§ 102.The modal verb ought tohas only one form which is used
with reference to the present or future. In reported speech it re-
ins unchanged. Ought is always followed by the infinitive with to.
§ 103.Ought to has the following meanings:
1) obligation,which in different contexts may acquire addi-
tinal shades of meaning, such as advisabilityand desirability,
;.You ought tosay a word or two about yourself.
Oughtshe to warnhim?
He oughtn't to mentionit to anybody.
In this meaning ought to is possible in all kinds of sentences,
though it is felt to be awkward in questions where should ispre-
ferred.
Generally ought to refers an action to the future and is fol-
lowed by the simple infinitive. With reference to the present ought
to is used with the continuous infinitive or with the simple infini-
tive if the verb is stative.
e.g. At your age you ought to be earningyour living.
You ought to feelsome respect for your elders.
In combination with the perfect infinitive ought to in the affir-
mative form shows that a desirable action was not fulfilled.
e-g. You ought to have chosena more suitable time to tell me
this news.
He ought to have put everything off.
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 oughtn't to have said it.
You oughtn't to have married her, David. It was a great mis-
take.
2) supposition implying strong probability,
e.g. The new sanatorium ought to be very comfortable.
The use of ought to in this case is not very common as this
meaning is normally rendered by must.
Note the set phrases He/you ought to know it (=he is/you are
supposed to know it). You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
shall and should
§ 104. Historically, shall and should were two forms of the
same verb expressing obligation. 1 But later they came to express
different meanings and in present-day English their use is not par-
allel — they are treated as two different verbs.
shall
§ 105. 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 is 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, he lent, resold, hired out or otherwise dis-
posed of without the publisher's consent.
1 Shall was the present tense of the Indicative Mood; should was the Subjunctive
Mood.
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 Fleur?
Who shall answer the telephone, Major?
Sentences of this kind are usually rendered in Russian with the
help of the infinitive: Принести вам еще кофе? Кому отвечать
по телефону? etc.
should
§ 106. In modern English the modal verb should is used with
reference to the present or future. It remains unchanged in re-
ported speech.
§ 107. Should has the following meanings:
1) obligation, which in different contexts may acquire addi-
tional 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?
Should in this meaning is found in all kinds of sentences. Like
ought to, it generally refers an action to the future and is followed
by the simple infinitive.
With reference to the present should is used with the Continu-
ous infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.
e-g- You shouldn't be sitting in the sun. Move out of it into the
hade.
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 sen-
tence 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 havestayed at home.
He should have toldme about it himself.
In a negative sentence should + Perfect infinitive serves to
show that an undesirable action was carried out.
e.g. Oh, Renny, you shouldn't have doneas you did!
They shouldn't have concealedit from us.
2) suppositionimplying strong probability,
e.g. The film should bevery good as it is starring first-class
actors.
The use of should in this case does not seem to be very com-
mon as this meaning is usually rendered by must.
§ 108.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. Here its use is structurally dependent
(for a detailed treatment of this use of the verb see "Verbs",
§§129, 131, 138, 140, 143, 149).
e.g, 1 suggest that you should stayhere as if nothing had happened.
"It's important," I broke out, "that the Barford people
should knowwhat we've just heard."
She was terrified lest they shouldgo ontalking about her.
Suddenly she began to cry, burying her. head under the book
so that I shouldn't see.
Ifhe should dropin, give him my message.
§ 109.Should may have a peculiar function — it may be used
for emotional colouring. 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:
1) In special emphatic constructions, where a simple predicate
isnot used:
a) in rhetorical questionsbeginning with why,
e.g. Why should I doit? (С какой стати я буду делать это?)
Why shouldn'tyou invitehim? (Почему бы вам его не при-
гласить?)
b)in object clausesbeginning with why,
e.g. I don't know why he should wantto see George. (Я не знаю,
зачем ему нужен Джордж.)
I don't see why we shouldn't makefriends,
c) in attributive clausesbeginning with why after the noun
reason,
e.g. There is no reason why they shouldn't get onvery well to-
gether. (Нет причины, почему бы им не ладить друг с
другом.)
I don't see any reason why he shouldn't be happy,
d)in constructions of the following kind,
e.g. The door opened and who should come inbut Tom. (Дверь
открылась, и кто бы вы думали вошел? Не кто иной,
как Том.)
As I was crossing the street, whom should I meetbut Aunt
Ann.
e) in the set phraseHow should I know? (Почем я знаю?).
In the above cases should may be followed by the Perfect in-
finitive which in simple sentences refers the action to the past (a)
and in complex sentences shows that the action of the subordinate
clause precedes that of the principal clause (b).
e-g. a) I went into business with her as her partner. Why shouldn't
I have doneit? (Почему бы мне было не сделать этого?)
b) He did not know why he should have expectedthem to
look different. (Он не знал, почему он ожидал увидеть
их другими.)
There were fifteen equally good reasons why she should
not have playedbridge.
2) In certain types of subordinate clauses where should + in-
finitive is interchangeable with a simple predicate in the Indica-
tive Mood (for the use of the Indicative Mood in these clauses see
"Verbs", § 130):
a) in object clausesafter expressions of regret, surprise,
sometimes pleasure or displeasure,
e.g. I'm sorry that you should thinkso badly of me. (Мне жаль,
что вы так плохо обо мне думаете.)
Не was little surprised that Ann should speakso frankly
about it.
I am content that you should thinkso.
Therules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here. The
Perfect infinitive is used to show that the action of the subordi
nate clause precedes that of the principal clause,
e.g. I am sorry that you should have hada row with Kate about it.
He was annoyed that they should have askedhim that,
b) in object clausesfollowing the principal clause with it as a
formal subject,
e.g. It is absurd that such things should happento a family like
theirs. (Нелепо, чтобы такие вещи случались в такой се-
мье, как их.)
It was strange that he should beasking those questions.
It struck him as exceedingly funny that his brother should
bein love.
In the principal clause we find such expressions as it is won-
derful (absurd, monstrous, natural, odd, queer, singular, strange,
terrible and the like), it infuriated (outraged, puzzled, startled,
surprised and the like) me, it struck me as funny, etc. We also
find the following interrogative and negative expressions in the
principal clause: is it possible {likely, probable)?, it is not possible
(likely, probable), it is impossible (improbable, unlikely). '
Aswe see from the above examples, the rules of the sequence
of tenses are not observed here either.
If the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the
principal clause, the Perfect infinitive is used after should.
1 After the affirmative it is possible (likely, probable) a simple predicate is used"
e.g. It is inconceivable that Mrs Crosbie should have writtensuch
a letter.
It's much better that you should have foundeverything out
before it's too late.
It infuriated her that he should have spokento her in such a
tone.
Note. Should + infinitive may be occasionally found instead of a simple predi-
cate in some other kinds of subordinate clauses, but it is not in common use:
a) in predicative clauses,
e.g. The part that interests me is that such a thing should happento such people.
b) in appositive clauses,
e.g. The fact that he should havemade such a brilliant speech surprised me greatly.
c) in constructions of the following kind,
e.g. That it should cometo this! (И до чего дошло дело!)
То think that it should cometo this! (Только подумать, до
чего дошло дело!)
То think that it should have happenedto me! (Только поду-
мать, что это произошло со мной!)
То sum it up, it should be said that as compared to the use of
a simple predicate in the Indicative Mood, the use of should + in-
finitive gives the statement emotional colouring such as surprise,
amazement, irritation, indignation, pleasure, displeasure, etc., i.e.
it emphasizes the speaker's personal attitude towards the facts
stated in the sentence. The Indicative Mood represents these facts
in a more matter-of-fact way.
must, should and ought to Compared
§110.All the three verbs serve to express obligation. Must,
however, sounds more forceful, peremptory.
e-g. You must doit at once. (Вы должны (обязаны) сделать это
немедленно.)
Both should and ought to express obligation, advisability, de-
sirability and are used when must would sound too peremptory.
e-g-You should doit at once. (Вам следует (нужно) сделать
You ought to doit at once. это немедленно.)
Should and ought to are very much alike in meaning and are
often interchangeable. In using ought to, however, we lay more
stress on the meaning of moral obligation, whereas should is com-
mon in instructions and corrections.
e.g. You ought to help him; he is in trouble.
You should use the definite article in this sentence.
Notice that ought to cannot be used instead of the emotional
should.
§111. Must, ought to and should serve to express supposition
implying strong probability. Must, however, seems to be in more
frequent use than the other two verbs.
should + Perfect Infinitive, ought to + Perfect Infinitive
and was/were to + Perfect Infinitive Compared
§ 112. Should + Perfect infinitive and ought to + Perfect infin-
itive show that the action has not been carried out though it was
desirable; was/were to + Perfect infinitive indicates an action that
has not been carried out though it was planned.
e.g. You should have helped him.
You ought to have warn him(Now he is in trouble.)
He was to have arrived last week. {But his plans were upset
by some cause or other.)
will and would
§113. The verb will1 has the following forms: will — the
present tense and would — the past tense. The latter form is used
in two ways: a) in past-time contexts to express an actual fact and
b) in present-time contexts to express unreality or as a milder and
more polite form of Will.
1 Will and would may also be used as verbs of full predication (not modal verb-)
Will may be used as a regular verb {wills, willed). It means проявлять волю, велеть
заставлять, внушать. Wouldis a defective verb. It is used with reference to the
present and means 'желать'. It is found mainly in poetry and like the verb to wish
followed by an object clause (see "Verbs", § 132), e.g. / would I were a careless child
While shall and should are treated as two different verbs in
modern English, will and would are considered to be the forms of
the same verb, its original meaning being that of volition.J How-
ever, in some of their meanings the use of will is parallel only to
would which denotes an actual fact in the past; in other meanings
will is found alongside would which expresses unreality in the
present or serves as a milder or more polite form of will.
§ 114. The use of will and would which denotes an actual fact
in the past is parallel in the following cases:
1) When they express habitual or recurrent actions,
e.g. She will (would) sit for hours under the old oak tree looking
at the beautiful country around her (...любит [любила] си-
деть, обычно сидит [сидела]...).
In addition to indicating a habitual action, will (would) in this
case implies willingness, personal interest on the part of the doer
of the action. Will (would) in this meaning is found in affirmative
sentences and is followed by the simple infinitive.
In present-time contexts will in this meaning is not common. In
past-time contexts would is mainly characteristic of literary style.
e.g. Then there were weekends when he would ride over to the
house of one farmer or another and spend a couple of nights
on the hills.
2) When they express refusal to perform an action,
e.g. The doctor knows I won't be operated on.
He was wet through, but he wouldn't change.
This meaning is found in negative sentences; will (would) is
followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually ren-
dered as никак не хочу, ни за что не хотел.
3) When they are used with lifeless things to show that a
thing fails to perform its immediate function.
e.g. My fountain pen won't (wouldn't) write.
The door won't (wouldn't) open.
' Volition is a general term which includes such meanings as willingness, readi-
ness, consent, intention and determination to perform an action.
In this meaning will (would) is found in negative sentences
and is followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually
rendered as никак не пишет {не писала), никак не открывает
ся (не открывалась) and the like.
4) When they are used with the first person to express will, in-
tentionor determination,
e.g. "Damn it!" he thought, "I'm going to get out of this hole. I
willmake money."
I am an Englishman, and I will sufferno priest to interfere in
my business.
I said I would doanything for him.
We decided that we wouldn't interfere.
This meaning is found in affirmative and negative sentences.
The present tense will, in addition to expressing its modal meaning,
serves to refer an action to the future; the past tense would is gen-
erally used in reported speech and also serves to refer an action to
the future but in this case it is viewed from a past moment.
§ 115.The use of will and would which expresses unreality in
the present or serves as a milder or more polite form of will is
parallel in the following cases:
1) in interrogative sentences where they express willingness,
Consent,
e.g. Willyou dinewith me tomorrow, Lewis?
"Won'tyou sitdown?" said the doctor.
You'll forgiveme, won'tyou?
"Would you doit?" she asked eagerly.
2) in clauses of condition introduced by if (see also "Verbs".
§ 149) where they also express willingness, consent,
e.g. "It's about forty minutes' walk from here and if you'll come
now I'll go with you," she said.
No, we are not going to quarrel at all if you'll only letme
talk.
If you would standby me I should have another try.
In both cases will (would) is followed by the simple infinitive
and the action always refers to the future.
Both interrogative and conditional sentences are often actually
polite requests in this case. There is hardly any difference be-
tween the use of will and would here; the role of would is to make
the request still more polite.
§ 116.The use of will and would is not parallel in the follow-
ing cases:
1) Will may be used to express suppositionwith reference to
the present or to the future in combination with the simple infini-
tive, or to the past in combination with the Perfect infinitive. This
meaning is found with the second and third persons.
e.g. This will bethe school, I believe. (Это, по-видимому, и есть
школа.)
You will have heardthe news, I'm sure. (Я полагаю, что вы
уже слышали новость.)
It should be noted that the use of will inthis meaning is not
common.
2) Would may be used rather sarcastically to express that
something was to be expected.It is found in affirmative and neg-
ative sentences.
e.g. "Auntie Meg has been very brave." "Yes. She would bebrave."
(That was to be expected of her under the circumstances.)
"I don't understand him and I don't approve of his decision."
"No,you wouldn't."(/ did not expect you would.)
This meaning can be rendered in Russian as Этого и следовало
ожидать.
3) Note the use of will in the following sentences:
e.g. Boys will beboys. (Мальчишки остаются мальчишками.)
Accidents will happen.(Без несчастных случаев дело не об-
ходится.)
4) Note the set phrases with will and would:
a) Will not have (won't have) followed by an object and an in-
finitive without to means 'I'll see to it that it does not happen.'
e-g. "I will not(won't) haveyou speakto me like that, her voice
came sharply. (Я не допущу, чтобы...)
b)Both would rather ('d rather) and would sooner ('d sooner)
followed by an infinitive without to mean 'to prefer'.
e.g. "I'd rather doit myself," said Luke.
He'd sooner diethan let me think he was a failure.
e) Would... mind in interrogative and negative sentences means
'to object'.
e.g. Wouldyou mindmy staying here for a while?
I wouldn't mindyour telling them about Hardy.
Would...mind in interrogative sentences may also express a
polite request.
e.g. Wouldyou mindgetting me a cup of tea?
§ 117.Would also occurs in certain subordinate clauses where
it is structurally dependent (for a detailed treatment of this case
see "Verbs", § 132).
e.g. I wish the rain would stopfor a moment.
I wish they wouldn't insiston it.
Need
§ 118.The modal verb needmay be used either as a defective
or as a regular verb.
1) Need as a defective verb has only one form which is the
present tense. In reported speech it remains unchanged. It is fol-
lowed by the infinitive without to.
Need expresses necessity.When reference is made to the
present or future it is followed by the simple infinitive. It is used
in negative and interrogative sentences.l
In interrogative sentences need usually implies that there is no
necessity of performing the action.
e.g. You needn't beafraid of me. (Вам не нужно/незачем бояться
меня.)
You need not meethim unless you'd like to.
Need I repeatit? (Нужно ли/К чему мне повторять это?)
1 Occasionally it may be found in affirmative sentences but it is not typical.
In negative sentences it is not always the verb need that is in
the negative form; the negation may be found elsewhere in the
sentence.
e.g. I don't think we need giveher any more of our attention.
I needhardly saythat I agree with you.
In combination with the Perfect infinitive need expresses an
action which has been performed though it was unnecessary. It im-
plies a waste of time or effort.
e.g- You needn't have come.The deal is off. (Вам незачем (не к
чему) было приходить. Вы зря пришли.)
It was obvious. You needn't have protested.
We needn't have toldhim a lie even if we didn't want to tell
him the truth. (Нам незачем (не к чему) было лгать
ему... Мы зря солгали ему...)
Note. Note that the Russian sentence Вам не следует/не надо беспокоиться
(волноваться) is rendered in English as You needn't worry (be nervous).
2) As a regular verb need can have all the necessary forms, in-
cluding the verbals. It also expresses necessity. Itis followed by
the infinitive with to and is mainly used in interrogative and nega-
tive sentences (like the defective need).