The modal verbs are:

can could
may might
shall should
will would

We use modal verbs to show if we believe something is certain, probable or possible (or not). We also use modals to do things like talking about ability, asking permission making requests and offers, and so on.


As 'could' and 'might' are said to be the weak or tentative versions of 'can' and 'may' respectively, is it correct to use 'would' in the same sense for 'will'?


Hello Adya's

Modal verbs in English are used in so many different ways that it's difficult for a statement like the one you mention to be accurate in all circumstances. Could you give a specific example? We could help you out with a specific case, but I'm hesitant to make any generalisations for fear of missing something out.

All the best

The LearnEnglish Team


Pls I Need More Clarity On This Rule Of Auxiliary Verb I Came Across While Studying: Auxiliary Verbs In Simple Present Tense Forms Are Followed By Verbs In Past Participial Forms. For Example:
1) I Am Done With The Assignment.
2) I Have Finished Cooking.

I Discovered That This Rule Is Unequally Yoked With These Examples:
1) I Do Known Him.
2) I Can Sung.

Pls Explain.

The correct rule goes like this: Auxiliary verbs in PRESENT PERFECT tense form are followed by verbs in past participle. Example:

I have eaten
She has seen
You have known.

Hi Cijo,

That rule is not correct. In 1, although 'done' is formed from the past participle, it is an adjective in this case. In 2, 'have done' is a present perfect verb. The other two forms you mention are not correct, I'm afraid.

All the best,
The LearnEnglish Team

Can you tell me if these two sentenses correct?
- Children have to greet their teachers.
- All children are to gather in the school hall at once!

In these sentences I compare two modal verbs have to and be to. As the book says the first one means - customary obligation, the general rule and the second one means an order. Are they grammatically and lexically correct?

Hello ifencing,

Both sentences are fine.

'Have to' can be used with both meanings, so you could use 'have to' in the second sentence as well.



The LearnEnglish Team

Hi teachers. I made up The following sentence :The manager asked if someone of us would be provided To go morocco he would be awarded The raise money. I was wondering if It is proper. Thanks in advance.

Hi rosario70,

I'm afraid that's not grammatically correct. If I understand what you mean, then I would recommend something like: 'The manager asked if one of us was willing to go to Morocco. The person who goes will be given a raise'.

All the best,
The LearnEnglish Team

I am trying to explain to professional colleagues who are translating into Spanish the difference in the use of SHALL in the following two phrases:
"Any requirement shall be permitted to be modified..."
"..the stories in the building shall be determined as follows.."
The former being optional, given the use of the verb permit, vs. the latter which is a mandatory requirement. I have looked at modal verb entries, but not being a professional language teacher, I just don't know how to explain how the difference in the use of "shall" when it modifies the verb permit vs when it is used alone.
The colleague insists that the use of "shall" makes the modification a requirement, and ignores the verb "permitted".
This issue has to do with building codes.
Thank you for any help you may be able to offer.