Student questions 2013 Workshop 6

Q: In the sentence "she might just as well have hit him with a steel club" does the modal might refer to the time ‘at past’ ?

A: The whole story is set in the past. The whole VGr is ‘might have hit’ and it expresses an event ‘before past’. Mary is thinking about something she has already done (hit him with a leg of lamb) and comparing it with something she didn’t do at that time (hit him with a steel club). She thinks the outcome would have been the same.

The time reference of VGrs with speculative/hypothetical modals like this one is difficult (when you start to think about it consciously) because ‘might’ in itself is the speaker’s judgement at the moment they are speaking. In this case, we could paraphrase the sentence starting ‘it was likely that if….’ – and ‘it was likely’ is of course ‘at past’. But that is a theoretical point and not much use in the classroom.

What is important to the learner is the time and reality of the event expressed by the main verb (hit). It is both UNREAL and PAST and that is why the perfect is used after the modal.

Q: “Would you like me to get you some cheese?” Does would here refer to ‘at present’ or ‘at past’?

A: The story as a whole is set in the past, as stories normally are. This, however, is direct speech; it is part of a dialogue and not part of the ‘story line’. She seems to be asking her husband how he feels at present. The purpose, of course, is to make an offer. ‘Would’ is a past form used for present time in this case (i.e. it is Distant) but the speaker does not really have a choice because ‘would…like’ is an idiomatic expression for making offers.

Q: It is difficult to tell conditional, speculative/hypothetical modals apart, so our question is how to distinguish them.

A: I am not sure it is always possible to separate them, but we tend to use the term ‘conditional’ when they occur in conditional clauses. Use a terminology which you think describes their meaning, and that your learners can understand. (I promise not to trip you up in the exam.)

Q: Can the chunk 'might as well' be considered as a fixed expression which provides a suggestion, equal the chunk of "she could have done"?

A: Mary is not suggesting that she should (or should have) hit him with a steel club. She is looking at the result of her action and drawing a conclusion. But you are right that ‘might as well’ is a fixed expression which means something like ‘it would make no difference’. It is often used in a light-hearted way in conversation, for example: Do you want another piece of cake? Yeah, go on then - might as well.

Q: Past time, politeness, uncertainty all express some kind of distance. Does that mean that all past tense forms refer to distance?

A: Yes, you could say that. However, when the reference time is past (as when we are telling a story) the normal choice for the writer/speaker is past tense. In other words, past tense for past time does not convey any special message.

If, however, a writer/speaker uses past tense for present time, they are doing it for a reason and so the reader/listener will try and understand what the special message is. That is when it becomes useful to talk about Distance. If I meet you on the stairs outside my office and say to you ‘Did you want to see me?’ the choice of ‘did’ (together with my tone of voice and so on) will have a different effect than if I had chosen ‘do’. ‘Distance’ can be a useful concept to explain that.

Likewise, if a writer/speaker uses present tense for past time it is useful to have a term to describe the effect of that. I have used the term ‘direct’ but perhaps you can find another term that you prefer.

Q: We didn’t get the meaning of “Would they mind awfully if she stayed just where she was until she felt better”.

A: This is reported speech. Mary perhaps said: “Would you mind awfully if I stay right here until I feel better”. (“Would you mind awfully” means “Would you mind very much”.) “Would mind” cannot be back shifted (at least not without changing the meaning) so it remains as it is, but the rest has been shifted to fit in with the past time reference of the surrounding text.

Q: “But you must eat!” Is this an order or obligation? Surely it depends on how the reader is interpreting the speaker’s emotions?

A: Absolutely. That is one reason why I gave you such a long text. It becomes clear that Mary is a devoted wife. Being a good wife is important to her. If you were an actor playing the role of Mary, how would you say it? Probably with concern in your voice, as if you were worried about your husband. She seems to be pleading with him. As you suggested, in another context it could be said in anger, trying to impose an obligation. “You must eat! I spent all day preparing it.”

Q: “… and you can have it right here and not even move out of your chair” Is this a suggestion, an offer or permission? If it is permission, the wife is allowing him to sit right there.

A: Who is going to bring the ‘meat and stuff’ to him? Obviously it is Mary, since he won’t need to move out of his chair. In other words, Mary is offering to bring him food to where he is sitting. It is more than just a suggestion.

In a different context, a very similar utterance could signal permission. For example, if Mary had been talking to her child and the child wanted to stay in her chair and watch a TV programme rather than sitting at the kitchen table to eat supper, Mary could give her

permission by saying something like this. The context of situation and the relationship between the speakers are both important in the interpretation.

Again, although we understand it perfectly the exact time reference is confusing (if you think about it consciously) because ‘you can’ means something like ‘it is possible for you to’ (at present) but the main verb (have=eat) obviously refers to something that will happen ‘after’. Learners won’t be confused by it though; they will focus on the time of the main verb and understand that it is after present.

One group asked if it is possible to make an offer without using an interrogative. Yes it is, and this is a good example. But interrogatives are often used for offers: “Shall I get your slippers” is one example. Mary is offering to go and get them. If she were just suggesting, she might say “Perhaps you’d feel more comfortable in your slippers.” But in some cases it can be difficult to distinguish between offers and suggestions, and there can be misunderstandings between speakers because of that.

Q: “Alright then, they would have lamb for supper.” We argued a lot about this. I think it is likelihood because she can’t be sure he is staying for dinner. She used ‘would’ not ‘will’, which is distant. Another one of us thinks it is prediction because she took the lamb out of the freezer already.

A: This is reported speech (or reported thought actually). We understand that she was thinking to herself “Alright then, we will have lamb for supper.” In the story it is reported and therefore backshifted – will becomes would. ‘Alright then’ makes it clear that she has made a decision. ‘Will’ shows her intention or determination, i.e. a strong willingness or ‘volition’.

That, of course, makes it probable that they will have it but she is not saying ‘it is probable that’ (it is not likelihood in other words). She is saying something like ‘I have now decided this’. Also, if she were predicting because of something she had seen she would be much more likely to say “we are going to have lamb for supper”. Somebody could say that for example if they had seen the cook already preparing it, or they had recognized the smell of roast lamb coming from the kitchen.

Q: “She couldn’t feel anything at all.” Is this possibility or ability?

A: When you say ‘possibility’, do you mean ‘likelihood’? “It was possible that…” is an expression of likelihood, but that is not what this means. We could instead paraphrase it “She wasn’t able to feel…” or we could say “It was not possible for her to feel…”‘Possible that…’ is likelihood, but ‘possible to’ is not. ‘Could’ here means ability/possible to.