Look at these examples to see how used to, would and the past simple are used.
They used to live in London.
I didn't use to like olives.
We would always go to the seaside for our holidays.
But one holiday we went to the mountains instead.
Try this exercise to test your grammar.
- Grammar test 1
Grammar explanation
When we talk about things in the past that are not true any more, we can do it in different ways.
Used to + infinitive
We can use used to to talk about past states that are not true any more.
We used to live in New York when I was a kid.
There didn't use to be a supermarket there. When did it open?
Did you use to have a garden?
We can also use used to to talk about past habits (repeated past actions) that don't happen any more.
I used to go swimming every Thursday when I was at school.
She used to smoke but she gave up a few years ago.
used to + infinitive should not be confused with be/get used to + -ing, which has a different meaning. The difference is covered here.
Would
We can use would to talk about repeated past actions that don't happen any more.
Every Saturday I would go on a long bike ride.
My dad would read me amazing stories every night at bedtime.
would for past habits is slightly more formal than used to. It is often used in stories. We don't normally use the negative or question form of would for past habits. Note that we can't usually use would to talk about past states.
Past simple
We can always use the past simple as an alternative to used to or would to talk about past states or habits. The main difference is that the past simple doesn't emphasise the repeated or continuous nature of the action or situation. Also, the past simple doesn't make it so clear that the thing is no longer true.
We went to the same beach every summer.
We used to go to the same beach every summer.
We would go to the same beach every summer.
If something happened only once, we must use the past simple.
I went to Egypt in 2014.
Do this exercise to test your grammar again.
- Grammar test 2
Hello,
May I know the difference between 'used to' and 'would'. Do they both show repeated actions in the past?
We used to go to the same beach every summer.
We would go to the same beach every summer.
Are these sentences have the same meaning?
Hello Aung Qui,
Both structures describe repeated/typical past habits and behaviour which is no longer true. The difference is that 'used to' can describe both actions (things we do) and states (things we are, such as how we feel, who we are or what we think) whereas 'would' is only used for actions. For example:
As a student, in the summer I would work on a farm for some extra cash.
In your examples 'go' is an action so both forms are possible.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again,
Could I ask this too?
She used to smoke but she gave up a few years ago.
She would smoke but she gave up a few years ago.
Are these two sentences correct?
Thank you for your marvellous work!
Hello,
Can anyone justify the correct choice in "But Dad ___ angry because he had done the same when he was a kid." in Grammar test 1? I would select "wouldn't get" (as a repeated (re)action) but "didn't use to get" is the correct answer.
Thanks in advance
Regards
Hello mexuper,
We don't really use the negative form of 'would' ('wouldn't') to talk about past habits, which is why that answer is marked as incorrect.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello,
Pawn Stars: FAMOUS WRESTLER Mick Foley Verifies RARE Memorabilia (Season 18) | History
Part 1:
Chum: Was this something they would've sold at like a wrestling event?
Mick: They wouldn't have been sold at the events but as a Halloween costume.
Is it? -> Repeated action in the past + Chum is not sure about where those things were sold or whether they were sold at all.
Part 2:
Chum: And I remember the one you would've wore (worn is probably better) was slightly a different color; it was more of a blue, am I right?
Mick: Much more blue on there.
After everything Chum has been through, he can't be sure about anything 🤣. I reckon if we replace 'would've worn' with 'used to wear' or just 'would', the idea will be similar but not quite identical, since 'would have worn' does add some uncertainty in this case.
Does it make sense?
Thank you
Hello Tony_M,
I'd have to have seen this video to be completely be sure, but it looks to me as if both parts are statements about past habitual actions. I wouldn't say there's any sense of uncertainty, but I suppose that from a certain point of view one could argue that there is some uncertainty because the speakers weren't in that past situation or, if we were there, they weren't in every such situation or don't remember all the details.
So in general I don't think grammars would describe the use of 'would have' here as one that includes the idea of uncertainty, but if I understand your point of view, I don't think it's wrong to see a slight sense of uncertainty in the statements. Does that make sense?
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello again Kirk,
Yes. Thank you. I do understand that I've asked so many questions already. If you have some time and my frequent messages haven't put you off helping me, below is a link you can use to watch the video. I am grateful, and if I can contribute to something you do as an organization or help in a different way, please tell me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR7EIg4LzEA
1:15 - You would find him in the boiler room. (Repeated action in the past)
2:10 - The shirt looks a little bit different of a color he would've wore in the ring. He wore one that was a little bit more blue. (Repeated action again + maybe some uncertainty. On the one hand if we replace 'would've' with 'used to' or 'would', it'll still sound natural, but on the other hand there might be some uncertainty, since Chum cannot know everything about Mick Foley's wrestling T-shirts.)
2:20 - Obviously, I think we all know this isn't the one Mankind would've wore because he had his own hair. (Repeated action, I would use 'would wear', the explanation is logical and clear, there's no uncertainty)
3:40 - Chum: Was this something they would've sold at like a wrestling event? (Supposition + habitual state/repeated action. Chum is a wrestling fan, and he presumes that this mask was sold at a wrestling event, as were some other wrestling memorabilia items he's seen before.)
Mick: They wouldn't have been sold at the events but as a Halloween costume. (Just repeats the same construction. I don't know why. 'These were not sold at the events..." sounds better. We can't use 'wouldn't' - it means a different thing, 'didn't use to be sold' - might be too cumbersome.)
4:20 - And I remember the one you would've wore was slightly a different color. Am I right? (Chum presumes that this is not the original T-shirt based on the knowledge he has, but he wants to be sure.)
Hi Tony_M,
I agree with what you say about 1:15. For the others, I think you understand the meaning of these forms correctly, but now that I see the full context I think I'd say they are speaking of hypothetical past situations, i.e. actions or situations that did not happen. But there is indeed an element of repeated or habitual actions at play in the statements as well given the context.
Hope this helps.
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Thank you. Sorry for being annoying, just wanted to understand.