20 Ok

UNIT 20
AUXILIARY AND MODAL VERBS: FORM AND

FUNCTION.
OUTLINE
1.
INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Aims of the unit.
1.2. Notes on bibliography.
2.
A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR AUXILIARY VERBS.

2.1. Linguistic levels involved.
2.2. Grammar categories involved: open vs. closed classes.
2.3. Major verb classes involved: lexical vs. auxiliary verbs.
2.4. The closed class of auxiliary verbs: what and how.
3. A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO AUXILIARY VERBS: PRIMARY AND MODAL.

3.1. The historical source of auxiliary verbs.
3.1.1. Phonological and morphological changes.
3.1.2. Syntactic tendencies in ME verb phrases.
3.2. A classification of auxiliary verbs.
3.2.1. Primary auxiliaries.
3.2.2. Modal auxiliaries.
3.2.3. Semi -auxiliaries.
3.2.4. Catenative verbs.
3.2.5. Modal idioms.
3.3. Modal vs. primary auxiliaries: main differences.
4.
MAIN STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF AUXILIARY VERBS: FORM AND FUNCTION.

4.1. On form: morphological features.
4.2. On pronunciation: phonological features.
4.3. On function: syntactic features.
4.3.1. Main syntactic constructions.
4.3.2. Simple and complex verb phrases.
4.3.3. General features of auxiliary verbs as operators.
4.3.4. General features of auxiliary verbs as lexical verbs.
4.3.5. Other specific types of verbs: syntactic function.
4.4. On semantics: meaning .
4.4.1.1. Ability: can, could, be able to.
4.4.1.2. Permission: can, may, could, be allowed to.
4.4.1.3. Possibility: may, might, can, could.
4.4.1.4. Impossibility, certainty and deduction: cant, must.
4.4.1.5. Necessity: must, have to, neednt.
4.4.1.6. Obligation: must, have to, need.
1/33
4.4.1.7. Advice: ought to, should, had better, be supposed to.

4.4.1.8. Suggestions, offers and invitations: can, could, shall, will, would.
4.4.1.9. Predictions: will, would.
4.4.2. Marginal auxiliaries.
4.4.4. Other types of auxiliaries.
4.5. On use: everyday usage and idiomatic expressions.
5.
6.
7.
8.
THE RELEVANCE OF CO-OCCURRENCE PATTERNS.

EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS.
CONCLUSION.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
2/33
1. INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Aims of the unit.
Unit 20 is primarily aimed to examine in English auxiliary and modal verbs in terms of form
and function, namely achieved by means of verbs and other specific structures. It is relevant to
mention at this point that the title may lead us to a misunderstanding since the category of
auxiliary verbs (in opposition to lexical/ordinary/full verbs) encloses a further classification into
primary auxiliary verbs and modal auxiliary verbs. Hence the former are commonly known as
auxiliaries and the latter, as modal verbs as in the title. Then, when primary and modal
auxiliaries are mentioned as a whole, we shall refer to them as auxiliary verbs.
Then, the study will be divided into seven chapters. Thus, Chapter 2 provides a theoretical
framework for this verb class, first, by answering questions such as, first, which linguistic levels
are involved; second, which grammar categories are involved in its description at a functional
level regarding open and closed classes; third, what major verb classes are involved regarding
lexical vs. auxiliary verbs; and finally, what the closed class of auxiliary verb describes and
how. Once this key terminology is defined, the reader is prepared for the descriptive account in
subsequent chapters.
Once we have set up the linguistic framework, we shall offer a general introduction to auxiliary
verbs in Chapter 3 regarding primary and modal auxiliary verbs by reviewing (1) the historical
origin of auxiliary verbs regarding phonological, morphological and syntactic changes; (2) a
classification of auxiliary verbs into primary, modal, semi-auxiliaries, catenative and modal
idioms; and finally, we shall present (3) the main differences between modal and primary
auxiliary verbs.
Chapters 4 will offer a descriptive account of the main structural features of auxiliary verb in
terms of form and function. With respect to the main structural features of auxiliary verbs, we
shall analyse them in terms of form and function namely following morphological,
phonological, syntactic and semantic guidelines. Thus we shall examine form regarding
morphology (verbal structures) and phonology (pronunciation) whereas function will be
approached in terms of syntax (verb phrase structure) and semantics (differences in meaning) in
order to get an overall view of this type of verbs working at the sentence level in assertive and
nonassertive contexts (affirmative, negative and interrogative forms). Moreover, we shall
analyze how auxiliaries work at the level of everyday use regarding everyday speech and
idiomatic expressions.
Chapter 5 presents some general considerations about the relevance of coocurrence patterns of
auxiliary and lexical verbs at the syntactic and semantic level since thanks to the combination of
all these paradigms, we get all the verbal forms we know today. Then Chapter 6 provides an
educational framework for the structural features of modal and auxiliary verbs within our
current school curriculum, and Chapter 7 draws on a summary of all the points involved in this
study. Finally, in Chapter 8 bibliography will be listed in alphabetical order.
3/33
1.2. Notes on bibliography.

In order to offer an insightful analysis and survey on auxiliary and modal verbs in English, we
shall deal with the most relevant works in the field, both old and current, and in particular,
influential grammar books which have assisted for years students of English as a foreign
language in their study of grammar. For instance, a theoretical framework for this type of verbs
is namely drawn from the field of sentence analysis, that is, from the work of Flor Aarts and Jan
Aarts (University of Nijmegen, Holland) in English Syntactic Structures (1988), whose material
has been tested in the classroom and developed over a number of years; Thomson & Martinet, A
Practical English Grammar (1986); and also, another essential work is that of Rodney
Huddleston, English Grammar, An Outline (1988).
Other classic references which offer an account of the most important and central grammatical
constructions and categories in English regarding auxiliary and modal verbs, are Quirk &
Greenbaum, A University Grammar of English (1973); Snchez Benedito, Gramtica Inglesa
(19759; and Greenbaum & Quirk, A Students Grammar of the English Language (1990).
More current approaches to notional grammar are David Bolton and Noel Goodey, Grammar
Practice in Context (1997); John Eastwood, Oxford Practice in Grammar (1999); Sidney
Greenbaum, The Oxford Reference Grammar (2000); Gerald Nelson, English: An Essential
Grammar (2001); Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, The Cambridge Grammar of
the English Language (2002); and. Angela Downing and Philip Locke, A University Course in
English Grammar (2002).
2.
A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR AUXILIARY VERBS.
Before examining in detail auxiliary verbs (primary and modal) in English in terms of form and
function, it is relevant to establish first a theoretical framework for this verb class in order to
fully understand the descriptive chapters about them. In fact, this theoretical chapter aims at
answering questions such as, first, which linguistic levels are involved; second, which grammar
categories are involved in its description at a functional level regarding open and closed classes;
third, what major verb classes are involved regarding lexical vs. auxiliary verbs; and finally,
what the closed class of auxiliary verb describes and how. Once this key terminology is defined,
the reader is prepared for the descriptive account in subsequent chapters.
2.1. Linguistic levels involved.

In order to offer a linguistic description of the main auxiliary verbs, we must confine it to
particular levels of analysis so as to focus our attention on this particular aspect of language.
Yet, although there is no consensus of opinion on the number of levels to be distinguished, the
4/33
usual description of a language comprises four major components: phonology, grammar,

lexicon, and semantics, out of which we get five major levels: phonological, morphological and
syntactic, lexical, and semantic (Huddleston, 1988).
First, the phonology describes the sound level, that is, how to pronounce this type of verbs (i.e.
weak and strong forms). Secondly, the morphological level describes how this type of verbs are
formed (i.e. can, could, be able to) and the syntactic level (i.e. how to place auxiliary and modal
verbs in a sentence). Third, the lexicon, or lexical level, deals with lists of vocabulary items
which, for our purposes, are different types of auxiliary verbs: primary and modal verbs.
Finally, another dimension between the study of linguistic form and the study of meaning is
semantics, or the semantic level, to which all four of the major components are related in this
study. We must not forget that a linguistic description which ignores meaning is obviously
incomplete, and in particular, when dealing with the auxiliary and modal verb semantics, since
it is from this linguistic field that we get the major differences among them (i.e. I can swim =I
have the ability to do it vs. I may swim = I am likely to do it).
2.2. Grammar categories involved: open vs. closed classes.

So far, in order to confine the auxiliary verbs to particular grammatical categories, we must
review first the difference between open and closed classes. Traditionally, the open classes are
verbs, nouns, adjectives and adverbs, and are said to be unrestricted since they allow the
addition of new members to their membership, whereas the closed classes are the rest:
prepositions, conjunctions, articles (definite and indefinite), numerals, pronouns, quantifiers and
interjections, which belong to a restricted class since they do not allow the creation of new
members.
However, following Quirk and Greenbaum (1973) and Aarts (1988), the two major types of
verb classes, lexical and auxiliary verbs, belong to two different grammatical categories, for
instance, the former constitute an open class where the latter constitute a closed class.
Moreover, since auxiliary verbs fall into the further distinction of primary auxiliaries and modal
auxiliaries, both subclassifications also belong to the small closed class, according to Quirk and
Greenbaum (1990).
Therefore, when dealing with auxiliary verbs at sentence level, we shall namely deal with
closed word classes within two specific types: primary auxiliary verbs (be, have, do) and modal
auxiliary verbs (can, could, may, might, shall, will, could, ...). Moreover, we also find closed
classes such as prepositions since certain auxiliary and modal verb constructions need of
periphrastic forms to be realized (i.e. He is going to record a CD; you have to clean your car). It
is worth noting that apart from grammatical categories, we may find other specific clause
structures, such as Youd better go now or I am used to getting up early.
5/33
2.3. Major verb classes involved: lexical vs. auxiliary verbs.

Then, the two major verb classes, lexical and auxiliary verbs, are said to work together at
sentence level. First of all, lexical verbs constitute the principal part of the verb phrase (i.e.
come, believe, think, go, speak, sing, etc) which can be accompanied by auxiliaries (i.e. Sarah
may come next week/Sarah may be coming next week) or not (i.e. Sarah came last week ) since
they can also occur in verb phrases that do not contain any other verbal forms.
As we will see, auxiliary verbs may be subclassified first in modal auxiliaries, which namely
comprise the following items: can, may, must, shall, and will. Other marginal members such as
dare, need, ought (to) and used (to) are also included because they can be used both as
auxiliaries and as lexical verbs (i.e. He needs to be careful vs. He neednt be careful), and also
because unlike the other auxiliaries ought and used are followed by a to-infinitive. However,
used may co-occur with do in negative and interrogative sentences (i.e. Did he use(d) to
drive a car?).
2.4. The closed class of auxiliary verbs: what and how.

On defining the closed class category of auxiliary verbs, we must link this notion (what it is) to
the grammar categories which express it (how it is showed). Then, on examining this type of
verbs, it is relevant to consider the ordinary verb class (lexical verbs) since most of its tenses are
formed with auxiliaries, hence the name. Actually, on answering What is it? auxiliaries are
defined as those closed class verbal items which help ordinary verbs form a tense or an
expression, for instance, by combining with present or past participles or with infinitives (i.e.
She is singing; they have listened; we didnt see you, respectively).
An ordinary verb then is defined as a grammatically distinct word class in a language having
two main properties, for instance, first, that (1) they are morphologically simplest words
denoting actions, processes or events which are usually in predicative position and may be
transitive or intransitive, and that (2) the members of this class carry inflections of tense, aspect
and mood if the language has these as inflectional categories. Similarly, it must be borne in
mind that all primary and not all modal auxiliary verbs have inflectional forms (be, have, do;
can, must, might, could , except have to: He has to pay for his meal) (Huddleston, 1988).
Regarding how this type of verbs is expressed, we shall namely deal with two types: primary
and modal auxiliaries which, on showing specific morphological, phonological, syntactic and
semantic features, will be broadly examined in next sections.
3.
A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO AUXILIARY VERBS: PRIMARY AND MODAL.
Once we have set up the linguistic framework, we shall offer a general introduction to auxiliary
verbs, that is, primary and modal auxiliary verbs, regarding (1) the historical origin of auxiliary
verbs regarding phonological, morphological and syntactic changes; (2) a classification of
6/33
auxiliary verbs into primary, modal, semi-auxiliaries, catenative and modal idioms; and finally,
we shall present (3) the main differences between modal and primary auxiliary verbs.
3.1. The historical source of auxiliary verbs.

In order to introduce the historical background of auxiliary verbs, we must trace back to the
period from Old English (OE) to Middle English (ME) in which certain changes taking place in
verb morphology affected the paradigms of weak and strong verbs 1 and, therefore, auxiliary
verbs. We refer to (1) phonological and morphological changes; and (2) general syntactic
tendencies in ME verb phrases regarding (a) the function of tenses and moods, (b) the
development of periphrastic or compound tenses and (c) the auxiliarization of preterit-present
and modal verbs.
3.1.1. Main phonological and morphological changes.

The main phonological and, therefore, morphological changes were: first, the levelling of final
unstressed vowels to schwa and the adoption of the dental suffix ed in order to avoid ambiguity
in the distinction of present and preterit tenses; and in the second place, the unstable quality of
inflectional /-n/ in infinitive forms (i.e. knowen) which favoured the general tendency of grade
reduction (i.e. know) by, first, levelling the singular preterit under the vowel of the 1st /3rd person
singular; and second, by eliminating the number opposition within the past2 .
So, as a result, many ME strong verbs became weak due to the analogical adoption of the
distinctive dental suffix for the preterit and past participle, typical of the weak paradigm (i.e.
help(en), helped, helped, helped) while others escaped the process of analogical le velling due to
their high occurrence in everyday speech (i.e. know(en), knew/knew(en), knowen). Yet, in late
ME all remaining strong verbs were affected by grade reduction and the original correlation of
four vowels and four grades was reduced to three (infinitive/present, preterit system, past
participle).
As a result, with this background in mind, we shall find the origin of our two main types of
verbs: first, the preterit-present verbs (modern modal auxiliary verbs) and second, anomalous or
suppletive verbs (primary auxiliary verbs). So, first of all, we find a few Old English verbs that
were originally strong but whose strong preterit came to be used in a present-time sense.
Consequently, they had to form new weak preterits which, still today, retain a dental suffix (i.e.
coude, schoulde).
1
Old English verbs were either weak, adding a d or t to form their preterits and past participles (as in modern love,
loved), or strong, changing their stressed vowel for the same purpose (as in modern sing, sang). Note that the vowel
change in strong verbs is called gradation or Grimms ablaut (i.e. drifan, draf, drifon, gedrifen; infinitive, preterit
singular, preterit plural, and past participle respectively), perhaps due to Indo-European variations in pitch and
stress, which must not be confused with mutation (umlaut) which is the approximation of a vowel in a stressed
syllable to another vowel in a following syllable (i.e. Mann-Mnner in German, and man-men in English).
2
It must be borne in mind that, originally, the usual correlation of a verb corresponds to four vowels and four grades
(infinitive/present, preterit singular, preterit plural and past participle).
7/33
This special group of verbs are to be called preterit-present verbs or, in other words, the main
source for the group of some modal verbs in Modern English which survive in their infinitive,
present and preterit forms (i.e. agan owe, ah, ahte (ought); cunnan know how, cann (can),
cude (could); magan be able, maeg (may), meahte (might); motan be allowed, mot, moste
(must); sculan be obliged, sceal (shall), sceolde (should).3
On the other hand, another group of commonly used verbs developed irregularities and
presented to some extent a mix of alternative present indicative forms from several different
roots (i.e. I am/was, you are/were, he is/was, they are/were). This group of verbs was known as
anomalous or suppletive verbs since they combined historically unrelated forms and included
verbs such as to be (OE beon), go (OE gan), do (OE don) and willen (will, want). For
instance, the Old English verb for be, like its Modern English counterpart, combined forms of
what originally were four different verbs (be, am, are, was).
3.1.2. Syntactic tendencies in ME verb phrases.

Regarding general syntactic tendencies in ME verb phrases which affect to our current auxiliary
verbs, we shall deal with the development from OE to ME syntax which was characterized by
the tranformation of an originally synthetic system into an analytic one, that is, that the language
could not simply rely on case endings (synthetic means) but needed of prepositions or a fixed
word order in the sentence (analytic means).
Therefore, as far as verb phrases are concerned, we must highlight (1) the function of tenses and
moods which underwent the reorganization of historical categories (weak and strong verbs) into
new regular and irregula r classes as well as the reduction of tenses into three (present/infinitive,
preterit, past participle) in the indicative, subjunctive and imperative moods; (b) the
development of periphrastic or compound tenses involving modal and auxiliary verbs in order to
express the perfect and progressive aspects together with the increasing use of prepositions, and
eventually, the development and establishment of passive progressive constructions as the
alternative to the active voice up to present days.
And finally, (c) the auxiliarization of preterit-present and modal verbs together with the
development of auxiliaries, such as the verb to do, which was considered as an auxiliary verb
empty of meaning in the 15th and 16th centuries. Yet, it was not untio the late 17th and 18th
centuries that the use of do became compulsory in negative and interrogative sentences,
particularly when there were no other auxiliaries in the sentence. Other uses of do were its
causative function (to cause, to make someone do somethin g) and the emphatic function (do +
infinitive).
The verb willan (wish, want) and its preterit wolde (the Modern English will and would) also became a part
of the present -day modal system although they did not belong to the mentioned group in Old English.
8/33
3.2. A classification of auxiliary verbs.

As seen before, according to Greenbaum and Quirk (1973) and Aarts (1988), we may
distinguish two major types of verb classes according to their function within the verb phrase:
lexical verbs (also called full or ordinary verbs) and auxiliary verbs, the latter category falling
into a further distinction: primary auxiliarie s and modal auxiliaries (see Appendix 1). Note that
in this section we shall also distinguish three more subclassifications, semi-auxiliaries, modal
idioms and catenative verbs (Quirk & Greenbaum, 1990) which are intermediate between
auxiliaries and main verbs on expressing modal or aspectual meaning.
3.2.1.
Primary auxiliaries.
The first subclassification, primary auxiliaries, comprises the items: do, have and be, where
do differs from have and be in that it usually co-occurs with lexical verbs only 4 . This
means that verb phrases with do contain only two verb forms, since verb phrases cannot have
more than one lexical verb (i.e. Do you believe him?/ Do come, John!). Moreover, it is used as
an auxiliary of periphrasis (i.e. He does not realize what he is doing/Who did he see?/ Only then
did he realize his position) and of emphasis (i.e. He DOES know what he is saying/ I DID lock
the door).
On the other hand, have and be co-occur not only with lexical verbs but also with modal
auxiliaries, always following the latter (i.e. He may have escaped; you must be crazy). Both
function as auxiliaries of aspect. Thus, have is auxiliary of the perfective aspect when
followed by the ed participle of another verb (i.e. He has written a new article ), and be is
auxiliary of the progressive aspect when it combines with the ing participle of another verb
(i.e. He is writing a new article ). Moreover, be is also used as auxiliary of the passive voice
when followed by the ed participle of a transitive (lexical) verb as in The theatre was built in
1909.
3.2.2.
Modal auxiliaries.
The second subclassification of auxiliary verbs, modal auxiliaries, comprises the following
items: can, could, may, might, must, shall, should and will. Other marginal members (or semimodals according to Thomson & Martinet, 1986) are dare, need, ought (to) and used (to)
because they can be used both as auxiliaries and as lexical verbs (i.e. He needs to be careful vs.
He neednt be careful), and also because unlike the other auxiliaries ought and used are
followed by a to-infinitive. However, used may co-occur with do in negative and
interrogative sentences (i.e. Did he use(d) to drive a car?).
4
It must be borne in mind that when be, have and do behave as lexical or ordinary verbs, they may
be seen as transitive verbs because of their syntactic features. Thus, be would function as a copulative
verb with an attributive complement (i.e. He is a teacher) whereas have and do would function as
transitive verbs (i.e. I have some birds; He does his homework).
9/33
3.2.3.
Semi-auxiliaries.
Thirdly, semi-auxiliaries are said to be a set of verb idioms which are introduced by one of the
primary verbs have and be (Greenbaum & Quirk, 1990). This type of auxiliary verbs has
nonfinite forms ( bare infinitive) and consequently can occur in combination with preceding
auxiliaries or in sequence. For instance, be able to, be about to, be due to, be bound to,
be going to, be likely to, be supposed to and have to.
3.2.4.
Catenative verbs.
Moreover, catenative verbs, like auxiliaries, have meanings similar to those for the aspectual
and modal auxiliaries (perfect and progressive tenses) and comprise the following items:
appear to, seem to and happen to. Note that some catenatives are followed by the nonfinite
forms ing or ed participles rather than by infinitives, for instance, start (working), go on
(talking), keep (on) (smoking), get (dressed).
3.2.5.
Modal idioms.
And finally, modal idioms are defined by Greenbaum & Quirk (1990) as a combination of
auxiliary and infinitive or adverb. Their main characteristic is that none of them have nonfinite
forms and as a result, they are always the first verb in the verb phrase, for instance, had better,
would rather, have got to, and be to.
3.3. Modal vs. primary auxiliaries: main differences.

Yet, the further distinction of modal auxiliaries (i.e. can, could, may, might, will, would, shall,
should ) and primary auxiliaries (i.e. have, be, do) show important differences as follows:
1. the former are always finite (showing tense, mood, aspect and voice) whereas the latter
have and be have finite as well as non-finite forms (an infinitive, an ing participle
or an ed participle);
2. the former invariably occur as the first element of the verb phrase (i.e. John will travel
to Paris) whereas the second and may occur in initial as well as in medial position in
the verb phrase (i.e. She has travelled / Has she travelled?);
3. moreover, in English modal auxiliaries are mutually exclusive, that is, they cannot be
combined with other auxiliaries (i.e. I shall come BUT NOT: I shall can come) whereas
primary auxiliaries are not exclusive and can be mixed (i.e. She has been playing).
4. finally, it is worth distinguishing the primary auxiliary do from the primary auxiliaries
have and be since it always occurs initially (i.e. Do you dare to do it? ), is invariably
finite, does not generally co-occur with other auxiliaries (i.e. She does her homework)
and finally, it is used for emphasis (i.e. She does write ) and periphrasis (i.e. Do you
smoke?).
10/ 33
4. MAIN STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF AUXILIARY VERBS: FORM AND FUNCTION.

With respect to the main structural features of auxiliary verbs, we shall analyse them in terms of
form and function namely following morphological, phonological, syntactic and semantic
guidelines. Thus we shall examine form regarding morphology (verbal structures) and
phonology (pronunciation) whereas function will be approached in terms of syntax (verb phrase
structure) and semantics (differences in meaning and use) in order to get an overall view of this
type of verbs working at the sentence level in assertive and nonassertive contexts (affirmative,
negative and interrogative forms). Moreover, we shall analyze how auxiliaries work at the level
of everyday use regarding everyday speech and idiomatic expressions.
4.1. On form: morphological features.

Generally, from a structural point of view, the verb forms operate in finite and nonfinite verb
phrases. Yet, it should be borne in mind that modal auxiliaries (will, shall, can, might) are
always finite whereas primary auxiliaries (have, be) have fin ite as well as non-finite forms.
Then, let us briefly review some of the finite and nonfinite verbal characteristics in order to
better understand modal and primary auxiliaries main features.
Thus, finite verb phrases are characterized because (1) they can occur as the verb phrase of
independent clauses; (2) have tense distinction; (3) as well as mood, which indicates the factual,
nonfactual, or counterfactual status of the predication (indicative, subjunctive, imperative); and
(4) generally, there is person concord and number concord between the subject of a cla use and
the finite verb phrase.
On the other hand, nonfinite verb phrases are characterized because (1) they contain a nonfinite form: an infinitive (speak or to speak), an ing participle (speaking) or an ed participle
(spoken/called); (2) they appear as the first or only verb in the verb phrase (disregarding the
infinitive marker to); and (3) because alike finite verb phrases, nonfinite phrases do not
normally occur as the verb phrase of an in dependent clause (i.e. To dance like that deserves an
award, I found him dancing like crazy or Having been insulted before, he was more sensitive
than ever).

So, with respect to the morphological characteristics which are specifically applied to finite
forms and in particular to modal auxiliaries, we can namely distinguish three: (1) first, that
modal auxiliaries are morphologically marked for the categories of tense, aspect and mood but
not concord (no s form for the 3rd person singular of the present tense); and (2) second, modal
verbs are always followed by an infinitive without a preceding to (i.e. He might go/I will buy
it).
Hence, the form he can is marked by the category of tense because it contrasts with he could
(present vs. past tense). The rest of tenses are usually to be found in semi-auxiliary verbs, which
11/ 33
paraphrase the base form, for instance, he can, he could vs. he is able to or he has been
able to. They may, in addition, be marked for the categories of mood in contrast with I dont
think he can (indicative vs. subjunctive), and aspect in contrast with She could have lifted it
(simple vs. perfect).
However, concord is not included since in most lexical verbs, concord is restricted to a contrast
between the third person singular present and other persons or plural number (i.e. You go/He
goes), but not at all with modal auxiliaries (i.e. You may go/He may go). Moreover, it would be
incorrect to apply nonfinite forms to modal auxiliaries, either following the base form of the
verb to say He can to walk nor preceding it since the verb form can cannot be preceded by
to.

Similarly, primary auxiliaries also take finite verbal features and therefore, share some of them
with modal auxiliaries but not all of them. For instance, they can occur as the verb phrase of
independent clauses (i.e. When he came, I ran out); have tense distinction (i.e. He is vs. He was;
He has vs. He had; He does vs. He did); as well as mood and aspect but in their case, there is
person concord and number concord between the subject of a cla use and the finite verb phrase,
that is, between the third person singular present and other persons or plural number (i.e. You
do/He does), but particularly clear with the present tense of be (i.e. I am, you are, he/she/it is,
we are, they are).
Thus, the form he drives, for example, is marked for all three categories. It is marked for tense
because it contrasts with he drove, for mood because it contrasts with he drive, for aspect
because it constrasts with he has driven or he is driving and for concord because it contrasts
with I/you/we/they write. As we can see, one of the main characteristics of primary auxiliaries
is that they may combine in order to construct perfective and progressive forms (i.e. He has
gone, He was talking too loud).
4.2. On pronunciation: phonological features.

When dealing with pronunciation of modal and auxiliary verbs, the notions of phonological
reduction (weak and strong forms) and that of contracted forms (short and long forms) must be
addressed. As we shall see, they are closely related to each other since short forms are
pronounced differently from long forms, that is, by means of weak and strong forms
respectively. We must not forget that morphological features such as contractions in both speech
and writing (i.e. I am vs. Im) give way to phonological changes in the same word or chain of
words.
Moreover, it must be borne in mind that (1) short vs. long forms correspond respectively to
institutionalized simplified forms and full forms both in speech and writing and (2) weak vs.
strong forms are respectively used in the speech chain when pronounced at high speed and when
12/ 33
pronounced clearly and separately. Yet, these notions shall be examined in affirmative, negative
and interrogative sentences in contracted and uncontracted versions.

With respect to the pronunciation of primary auxiliaries in affirmative (or assertive) sentences,
we shall deal with both dualit ies, that is, short vs. long forms and weak vs. strong forms 5 . Thus
the verbal forms can /kaen, k6n/, could /kud, k6d/, shall /Sael, S6l/, should /Sud, S6d/ and
must /m^st, m6st/ present double pronunciation for weak and strong forms but cannot be
contracted; similarly, may /mei/ and might /mait/ cannot be contracted either but only have
strong pronunciation. On the other hand, will /wil/ and would /wud/ can be contracted as in
ll /6l/ and d /6d/ and also present weak and strong forms. Note that the contraction d may
represent either had or would.
We must bear in mind that agreements with affirmative remarks are made with yes/so/of course
+ affirmative modal auxiliary, for instance, There may be a party- Yes, there may. Similarly,
agreements with negative remarks are made with no + negative modal auxiliary, for instance, I
havent paid you yet. No, you havent. Moreover, additions to remarks can be made by
subject + auxiliary + too/also (i.e. Bill could do it and Cristine could too) or by so + auxiliary
+ subject (i.e. Bill would enjoy it and Cristine would so). When both remarks are made by the
same person, both subjects are usually stressed whilel when made by different people, the
second subject is much more stressed than the first.
Moreover, negative (or non-assertive) forms are formed when the enclitic particle nt is attached
to most operators as a contraction of the negative word not and therefore we may find
uncontracted and contracted forms which sometimes show differences in pronunciation. Note
that the final /t/ in the negative contractions is commonly not sounded. For instance, can
not/cannot vs. BrE cant /ka:nt/ and AmE /kaent/; could not vs. couldnt /kudnt/; may not vs.
maynt6 /meint/; might not vs. mihtnt /maitnt/; shall not vs. shant /Sa:nt/; should not vs.
shouldnt /Sudnt or S6dnt/; will not/ll not vs. wont /w6unt/; would not/d not vs. wouldnt
/wudnt/; and must not vs. mustnt /m^snt/.
And finally, regarding interrogative (and also exclamative) forms, we must address to the
syntactic functions of question tags or additions to remarks, since in this environment modals
are presented in their full forms and pronounced as strong forms, for instance, You can do it,
cant you? or If the girls can cheat, so can I! Note that when question tags are said with
falling intonation as statements because the speaker merely expects agreement. However, if the
speaker does want information, the question tag is said with a rising intonation.
Since the symbol for schwa is not available in this computer writing, we shall use number six 6 instead
from now on.
6
According to Greenbaum & Quirk (1990), we find nonexistent forms of maynt and shant in AmE while in BrE
both forms are becoming rare.
13/ 33

With respect to the pronunciation of modal auxiliaries in affirmative (or assertive) sentences, we
shall deal again with both dualities, that is, short vs. long forms and weak vs. strong forms7 in
their finite and nonfinite forms. Thus the verbal forms of be are: (a) for present, full and short
forms in first person singular: am /aem/ and /6m/ or m /m/; second person singular: are /a:/
or re /6/; and third person singular: is /iz/ or s /z/, /s/. (b) for past forms: first and third person
singular: was /woz/ or /w6z/; and were /we:/ or /w6/ for second person singular and first and
third person plural; (c) for nonfinite forms, such as the base infinitive be /bi:/ and /bi/; the ing
form being /bi:in/; and the ed participle been /bi:n/ or /bin/.
Similarly, we find the verb have and do. For instance, (a) the finite forms of have for the
present tense, such as the full forms has /haez/ or /h6z/ and have /haev/ or /h6v/, and their
respective contracted forms s /z/ or /s/ and ve /v/ or /f/; and for the past tense had /haed/,
/h6d/ or /d/. Moreover, we also find (b) the nonfinite forms such as the base infinitive have,
the ing fomr having /haevin/ and the ed participle had /haed/ and /h6d/. Note that the
contraction s may represent either is or has.
With respect to the verbal forms of do, we also find (a) finite forms for present tenses do
/du:/ and /d6/ and for third person singular does /d^z/, /d6z/, /z/ or /s/; and for past tenses: did
/did/. Moreover, we find (b) nonfinite forms, such as the base form do, the ing form doing
/du:in/ and the ed participle done /d^n/. As we may note, does can be informally
pronounced /z/ as in When does the show start? or /s/ What does it mean?.
We must bear in mind that agreements with affirmative remarks are made with yes/so/of course
+ affirmative primary auxiliary, for instance, There is a party- Yes, there is. Similarly,
agreements with negative remarks are made with no + negative primary auxiliary, for instance,
I didnt pay you. No, you didnt. Moreover, additions to remarks can be made by subject +
auxiliary + too/also (i.e. Bill had it and Cristine had it too) or by so + auxiliary + subject (i.e.
Bill was here and Cristine was so). When both remarks are made by the same person, both
subjects are usually stressed while when made by different people, the second subject is much
more stressed than the first.
Moreover, negative (or non-assertive) forms are formed when the enclitic particle nt is attached
to most operators as a contraction of the negative word not and therefore we may find
uncontracted and contracted forms which sometimes show differences in pronunciation 8 . Note
that the final /t/ in the negative contractions is commonly not sounded. For instance, am not/m
not; are not/re not vs. arent /a:nt/; is not/s not vs. isnt /iznt/; was not vs. wasnt /woznt/;
were not vs. werent /we:nt/; have not/ve not vs. havent /haevnt/; has not/s not vs. hasnt
/haeznt/; had not/d not vs. hadnt /haednt/; do not vs. dont /d6unt/; does not vs. doesnt /d^znt/;
did not vs. didnt /didnt/.
7
Since the symbol for schwa is not available in this computer writing, we shall use number six 6 instead
from now on.
8
We may also find nonstandard contractions in some of these forms, especially in AmE. For instance,
Aint instead of am not, is not, are not, has not and have not, and the special use of arent as the standard
contraction for am not in questions (i.e. Arent I tired?).
14/ 33
And finally, regarding interrogative (and also exclamative) forms, we must address to the
syntactic functions of question tags or additions to remarks, since in this environment modals
are presented in their full forms and pronounced as strong forms, for instance, You are doing it
again, arent you? or The girls cheated and so did you! Note that when question tags are said
with falling intonation as statements because the speaker merely expects agreement. However, if
the speaker does want information, the question tag is said with a rising intonation.
4.3. On function: syntactic features.

When dealing with the syntactic function, we shall address the main syntactic features of
auxiliary verbs by reviewing (1) the ir main syntactic constructions; (2) the difference between
simple and complex clauses regarding their finite and nonfinite verbal forms; (3) general
features of auxiliary verbs when functioning as operators; and other (4) specific features for
both types of auxiliaries when functioning as lexical verbs; finally, we shall review (5) the
syntactic function of some specific types of verbs such as marginal modal auxiliaries, semiauxiliaries, catenative verbs and modal idioms.
4.3.1. Main syntactic constructions.

As a rule an auxiliary verb cannot stand on its own since it must be followed by a lexical verb
(i.e. He may come tonight), except in cases where the lexical verb is understood, as it is the case
of other sentence constituents such as question tags in Can Anthony come? Yes, he can
(come). Moreover, regarding present syntactic features, Aarts (1988) states that the verbal
phrase may be constituted by a sequence of one or more verbs where the maximum number of
verbal forms is five.
Note that this type of construction is achieved by means of maximum four auxiliaries + a lexical
verb (i.e. the e-mail was sent, someone was sending it, anyone can send it, it may be sent, it has
been being sent, it may have been being sent -this latter is rare-) depending on the semantic
feature we intend to express, that is, tense (verbal tense), aspect (progressive or perfect) or mood
(indicative, subjunctive, imperative).
In fact, the given answers would provide, respectively, details about the exact point of time in
which the situation happens (i.e. He can do it: present vs. He could do it: past); grammatically,
the appropriate verbal tense form; details about the duration of the action, that is, in progress or
completed (i.e. He is writing vs. He has written); and finally, semantic details about the
speakers attitude in their speech, such as advice, obligation, ability, possibility, etc (i.e. You
should go and see her = advice vs. You have to go and see her = obligation).
15/ 33
4.3.2. Simple and complex verb phrases.

But, let us focus on some syntactic features of simple and complex verb phrases. For instance,
the simple finite verb phrase consists of only one word without ellipsis whereas the complex
one consists of two or more words. When dealing with verb phrase, we deal with finite and
nonfinite verbal forms, that is, combining together to form the modal, perfective, progressive
and passive auxiliaries which follow a strict order in the complex verb phrase.
It should be borne in mind that, while modal auxiliary verbs (or modals) only have a unique set
of finite forms in the auxiliary function, the primary verbs be, have and do have both finite and
nonfinite verbal forms and, therefore, they may function as lexical and auxiliary verbs, having
then other auxiliary functions such as (1) perfective forms with the auxiliary have (i.e. He has
gone, he must have gone); (2) progressive forms with the verb be (i.e. He is talking too loud)
and (3) passive forms with the verb be (i.e. He was visited).
However, although the above order is strictly followed, we find some exceptions, such as with
(4) modal + progressive (i.e. may be visiting); (5) perfect + passive (i.e. has been built); and (6)
modal + passive (i.e. may be visited).
4.3.3. General features of auxiliary verbs as operators.

With respect to the general features of both types of auxiliary verbs (modal and primary
auxiliaries) we must say that they share certain functions in a verb clause at the level of
affirmative, negative and interrogative sentences when functioning as operators. For instance,
(1) in affirmative sentences, they become operators when they occur as the first verb of a
finite verb phrase (i.e. You can lift that heavy box; you are able to do it).
(2) in negative sentences, the negative adverb not (or tis enclitic form nt) is added
immediately after the operator as in He may swim vs. He may not swim and She is tall
vs. She is not/isnt tall. Note that can has a special negative form since not is not
separated from the operator (i.e. cannot).
(3) in interrogative sentences, we find an inversion of subject and operator, that is, the
operator is placed in front of the subject (i.e. They will tell us the truth vs. Will they tell
us the truth?). This inversion construction also occurs in sentences with introductory
negatives or semi-negatives, as in Had I know, I would have gone, At no time was the
seat free.
(4) in elliptical clauses, the role of operators is present when the rest of the predication is
omitted, as in the case of short answers (i.e. Did you like the play?-Yes, I did), question
tags (i.e. She is joining us, isnt she?) or additions to remarks (i.e. We enjoyed the film
and so did they).
(5) regarding phonology, the operator will function as an emphatic form in finite positive
clauses (rather than negative) by means of nuclear stress in order to deny a negative
which has been stated before (i.e. Wont you give it back?- Yes, I will do it). Moreover,
note that when there is no operator in an assertive sentence, the primary verb do is
introduced as a substitute of the lexical verb in any other kind of clause (i.e. You drive a
16/ 33
car=Do you drive a car?) or as an emphatic element (i.e. You never listen to me but you
do listen to your tutor).
(6) No imperative forms are realized in this type of function since they are not lexical
verbs, for instance, we cannot say Can! or Be! (Thomson & Martinet, 1986).
4.3.4. Specific features of auxiliary verbs as lexical verbs.

However, these general rules are quite different when we deal with auxiliary verbs functioning
as lexical verbs since clause patterns change. In this section, we shall namely deal with the
primary verbs be, have and do which are the ones that may change at this point from the
general rule s stated above whereas modal auxiliaries do not change their syntactic function
since they always form their affirmative, negative and interrogative according to the pattern
stated above (i.e. You must, you mustnt, must you?).
The primary verbs be, have and do, when used as auxiliaries, require a participle or
infinitive in order to have full meaning. However, when used as ordinary verbs they are the only
verb in the sentence, be keeps its auxiliary pattern (i.e. He is nice; he isnt nice; is he nice?)
whereas do takes auxiliaries for negative and interrogative (i.e. You dont do it properly/Do
you do it properly?) and have may be conjugated in either way (i.e. You havent a house/You
dont have a house/Have you (got) a house?/Do you have a house?).
Thus, as an auxiliary, be has two functions : first, to form the progressive aspect and second,
the passive. On the other hand, as a lexical verb, it also has two functions: first, as a copular
verb (i.e. She is a nurse) and second, as an intransitive verb (i.e. She is in the office). Similarly,
have functions both as an auxiliary and as a main verb. As the former, it helps form the perfect
aspect in combination with an ed participle in complex verb phrases (i.e. I have studied/You
must have done it very quickly) and as the latter, it normally takes a direct object (i.e. He has no
idea).
And finally, do, like be and have can be both an auxiliary and a main verb. As an auxiliary,
do has no nonfinite forms, but only present and past forms whereas as a main verb, it can
function as a pro-predicate (i.e. Why are you doing that?) and as a transitive verb, especially in
informal speech (i.e. Lets do the washing up!).
4.3.5. Other specific types of verbs: syntactic function.

In this section, we shall also examine the syntactic function of other specific types of verbs
which are said to share all the features of modal auxiliaries but which are often functioning as
ordinary verbs, such as marginal modal auxiliaries, semi-auxiliaries, catenative verbs and
modal idioms. Yet, assertive contexts (affirmative sentences) usually share the same forms for
both types whereas nonassertive contexts (negative and affirmative sentences) differ in sentence
patterns.
17/ 33
Thus, (1) the first type, marginal modal auxiliary verbs (need, dare, used to, ought to) can be
both auxiliary and ordinary verbs. For instance, need as an auxiliary is a semi-modal with the
corresponding sentence patterns 9 (i.e. He need go/He neednt go, need he go?/neednt he go?)
but as an ordinary verb, the negative and interrogative forms change, taking the full infinitive
(i.e. He needs to go/He doesnt need to go/Does he need to go?). As an ordinary verb, it is
considered to be transitive (i.e. They need a new car).
Similarly, dare is also a semi-modal and it can take both auxilia ry and ordinary forms, though
the ordinary verb construction is more commonly used. Note that in the affirmative dare is
conjugated like an ordinary verb both for ordinary or auxiliary verbs (i.e. You dare/he dares/he
dared). while in the negative and interrogative it can be conjugated either like an ordinary verb
or like an auxiliary (i.e. You do not dare/he does not dare vs. You dare not/He dares not; Do
you dare?/Does he dare? Vs. Dare you?/ Dare he?). Dare is also an ordinary transitive verb
followed by object + full infinitive (i.e. He dared me to jump from a plane).
As seen, dare and need can be used either as modal auxiliaries (with bare infinitive and
without the inflected forms) or as main verbs (with to-infinitive and with inflected s, -ing, and
past forms). The modal construction is restricted to nonassertive contexts (namely negative and
interrogative sentences) whereas the main verb construction can always be used, and is more
common.
Similarly, used to is used in both auxiliary and ordinary sentence patterns. As the past tense of
a defective verb, used has no present tense and it always takes the to-infinitive. The
affirmative forms take used for all persons whereas in nonassertive contexts, it may function
as both auxiliary and ordinary verb. For instance, in the negative, we may find He used
not/usednt to play chess or He didnt use(d) to play chess and in the interrogative Did he use
to play everyday?/He used to play, didnt he?.
Surprisingly, ought to does not follow the general pattern in nonassertive contexts and applies
the auxiliary pattern to all its forms. It is also considered to be a semi-modal which normally
takes the to-infinitive although it is optional in elliptical cases (i.e. Yes, I think he ought (to)).
Secondly, (2) the semi-auxiliaries such as be able to, be about to, be due to, be bound to,
be going to, be likely to, be supposed to and have to are said to be under the pattern of the
primary verbs be and have whereas (3) catenative verbs such as appear to, seem to,
happen to and also start (working), go on (talking), keep (on) (smoking) and get
(dressed) shall follow the sentence patterns for ordinary verbs. Finally, (4) modal idioms such
as had better, would rather, have got to, and be to function under the scope of auxiliary
verb patterns.
18/ 33
4.4. On semantics: meaning.

In this section we shall examine the function of semantics within the auxiliary verbs, that is, the
different meanings they have and their use in everyday speech. It must be borne in mind that
meaning and use are closely interrelated to syntax since they are used in the English language to
form complex structures such as perfective, progressive and passive forms as well as the future
and conditional tense. Moreover, as stated before, they are used to construct negative and
interrogative sentences, short answers, question tags, elliptical phrases and even, emphatic
answers.
However, we shall analyse the meaning of modal auxiliaries and primary auxiliaries separately
since, despite of the fact that they share many morphological, phonological and syntactic
features, they show relevant differences in significance, and in particular modal auxiliaries when
dealing with peoples attitude or personal point of view about events or facts. Moreover, other
types of auxiliaries will be analyzed, such as marginal auxiliaries, semi-auxiliaries, catenative
verbs and modal idioms.

Following Snchez Benedito (1975), modal auxiliaries, are traditionally defined as auxiliaries of
lexical (or main) verbs which express different modalities in meaning and therefore, use
(possibility, ability, permission, etc) by means of a reduced group of auxiliary verbs and other
marginal verbs. Within the field of semantics, modals are said to show peoples attitude and
intention towards other people or events through a wide range of ideas, nuances and concepts
within different contexts of formality or informality.
For instance, the meaning and therefore the usage of different modal auxiliaries in order to
express someones attitude or intention depends to a great extent on three main factors: (1) the
relationship speaker and listener has, that is, the level of acquaintance with each other (just
introduced, friends, family, educational links (student-teacher) or any other such as criminallawyer, shop-assistant-customer, etc); (2) the speakers intention towards other people or
actions, that is, the intention to suggest, invite, advise, order, etc when dealing with people or on
the other hand, the intention to express a variety of circumstances when dealing with situations,
for instance, deduction, probability, certainty, truth/falsehood, internal or external obligation,
moral or legal pr inciples, and so on; and finally, (3) the context of the situation, that is, formal or
informal (i.e. Can/May/Could I open the window, please?).
As we can see, modals are included as part of the verbal form system in order to express those
concepts that verbal tenses are unable to express since the sentence meaning is not clear enough.
Therefore, modal verbs will show people s attitude in terms of ability; permission; possibility;
impossibility, certainty and deduction (positive and negative); necessity; obligation (absence or
presence); advice; suggestions, offers and invitations; and predictions (Snchez Benedito, 1975;
Thomson & Martinet, 1986; Eastwood, 1999).
9
Note that as a modal, need takes the forms need or need not/neednt for all persons in the pres ent
19/ 33
4.4.1.1. Ability: can, could , be able to.

Ability is namely expressed by can, could and be able to when we say that something is
possible in terms of ability or inability (i.e. Cristine can/cant swim) or opportunity (i.e. Cristine
can go to the concert). In the present tense, be able to is a little more formal and less usual
than can (i.e. Anne is quite good at computering and she can/is able to work on
programming). Note that we always use be able to and not can in the context of certain
structures such as to-infinitive (i.e. Its good to be able to talk to you again); after a modal verb
(i.e. She must be able to accept it); and with present perfect (i.e. In the end Ihave been able to
buy my favourite book ). Also, note that for the future and conditional sentences, we also use be
able to (i.e. You will be able to forgive her/I wouldnt be able to do it). Moreover, in order to
suggest a possible future action, we normally use can (i.e. Lets go to the theatre tonight. We
can go together).
On the other hand, in order to express ability or opportunity in the past, we use could and
was/were able to (i.e. She could/was able to play the violin). When meaning that the ability or
opportunity resulted in a particular action, something that really happened, or implying some
kind of difficulty, we use be able to but not could (i.e. He could swim when he was three vs.
He was able to swim 200 km in the competition). In nonassertive contexts, we can use either
form (i.e. It was snowing so the aeroplane couldnt/wasnt able to take off). Moreover, we
normally use could and not be able to with verbs of senses (seeing, hearing, etc) and with
verbs of thinking (i.e. She could see the film/she could smell gas/she could hear everything/and
so on).
4.4.1.2. Permission: can, may, could, be allowed to .

In general, talking about permission is namely expressed by can, may, could and be allowed to
in order to convey the meaning of (1) giving and refusing permission and (2) asking for and
about permission in present and past situations.
First of all, (1) to give permission in the present we normally use can, may or could (i.e.
You can/may/could sit here) and even, some authors (Thomson & Martinet, 1986) include
might as an indicator of permission (i.e. He might go in) although it is not very common in
normal speech but indirect speech and indicates hesitation. Note that may is the most formal
and is often used in impersonal statements concerning authority and permission (i.e. A police
officer may arrest you). Both can and could are used in colloquial speech as an informal
alternative to may but note that can implies the idea of having permission whereas could
implies the idea of condition (i.e. You could use my phone if you need it).
Generally, for permission in the past, we use could and be allowed to (i.e. When I was a
child I could/was allowed to spoil things). However, when a particular action was permitted and
performed we use was/were allowed to instead of could (i.e. I had my passport so I was
allowed to cross the frontier). On the other hand, to refuse permission in the present, we use
and future and in indirect speech (Thomson & Martinet, 1986).
20/ 33
cant or may not (i.e. Im afraid you cant/may not sit here) but not couldnt which is used
in the past (i.e. We couldnt bring our dog into the pub). It is worth noting that sometimes we
can also use must not (i.e. Dogs must not be brought into this pub).
Secondly, when talking about permission, we sometimes talk about rules made by someone else,
and then we need (2) to ask for permission and ask about permission by means of requests.
Following Thomson & Martinet (1986), to ask for permission, we can use can I?, could I?, may
I? and might I? as possible requests for permission in the present and future. For instance, can I?
is the commonest and most informal of the four; could I? and may I? are the most useful as
they can express both formal and informal requests. However, the latter (may I?) is a little more
formal than the previous one (could I?); might I? is more diffident than may I? and indicates
greater uncertainty about the answer.
The negative interrogative forms cant I? and couldnt I? show the speakers hope for an
affirmative answer (i.e. Couldnt I pay by credit card?- (Yes, of course you can)) but when the
answer is negative, we replace a direct negative by a milder expression (i.e. Id rather you
didnt/Im afraid not). On the other hand, with respect to questions about permission, these are
expressed by can or am/is/are allowed to (i.e. Can he take a photo of you? = Is he allowed to
take a photo of you?)
4.4.1.3. Possibility: may, might, can, could .

We use may, might, can, could to express possibility in general and in this section we will
approach the slight differences among them. Thus, regarding the first pair, although may and
might normally express possibility, the latter slightly increases the doubt. Again, although
both of them are used for present and future (i.e. She may/might tell her husband), might must
be used in the conditional when the expression is introduced by a verb in the past tense (i.e. If
you invited them they might come) and in indirect speech (i.e. He said he might visit us).
Moreover, may and might can be used in conditional sentences instead of will and would
just to indicate the possibility or certainty of a result (i.e. If they see you they will smile at
you=certainty vs. If they see you they may smile at you=possibility). When we say that
something was possible in the past, we can use either may/might + perfect infinitive (i.e.
Where is Tom? He may/might have gone already). Could + perfect infinitive can also mean
that something was possible but didnt happen (i.e. The police could have caught him = but they
didnt catch him yet).
As we can see, may and might present no problems in the affirmative and negative form, but
they do with the interrogative forms since we must use the constructions be + likely (infinite
form) or think, which are more usual than may and might (i.e. Do you think/Is it likely that
the plane will land on time?). Moreover, this pair can be used in speculations about past actions
using the structure may/might + perfect infinitive (i.e. They may/might have been here).
Secondly, regarding could we can say it is an alternative to may and might (i.e. She
may/might/could be at the bank=Perhaps she is at the bank ) in the affirmative form. In the
21/ 33
negative, though, there a difference of meaning between may/might and could since the
former express possibility whereas the latter expresses negative deduction. For instance,
observe: He may/might not eat that sandwich meaning that perhaps he is not hungry any more
vs. He couldnt eat that sandwich meaning that perhaps it is impossible for him to eat it
because of its size, taste, or whatever reason. In the interrogative we can use either could or
might (i.e. Could/Might she be studying?= Do you think/Is it likely that she is studying?).
Note that in the past, we use the construction could + perfect infinitive to express that
something was totally impossible (i.e. He couldnt have eaten that sandwich). Moreover, we
often use the continuous form may/might/could + have been + -ing to talk about a past
possibility (i.e. He didnt come to the party. He may/might/could have been sleeping).
Finally, can is also used to express general possibility in the present and past only, and chiefly
in the affirmative. Can makes reference to something that it is possible because circumstances
permit it in opposition to the kind of possibility expressed by may (i.e. You can go sailing = It
is sunny, the sea is calm and therefore, it is safe). Moreover, can can also express occasional
possibility (i.e. Oysters can be quite dangerous = when eating them out of date ). Could would
be then used in the past (i.e. They could be quite understanding).
4.4.1.4. Impossibility, certainty and deduction: cant, must.

In the present, we normally use cant when we realize that something is impossible (i.e.
Patrick cant be in Greece now. I saw him at work this morning) and must when we realize
that something is certainly true or we make deductions (i.e. Nobody answered the phone. They
must be out). Note the short anwers, for instance, Do you dare to jump?- Do not insist. She
cant do it and Is she in? She must be. Note that in both cases we increase the notions of
impossibility or certainty by stressing cant and must.
Similarly, in the past we may also use cant + perfect infinitive when we think something was
impossible (i.e. Someone took my money from the drawer. Nicky cant have done it) and must
+ perfect infinitive when we feel certa in something was true in the past (i.e. The window was
broken. Children must have done it when playing).
4.4.1.5. Necessity: must, have to , neednt.

The notion of something being necessary or not being necessary is namely expressed in
English by the affirmative forms must and have to and the negative form neednt. Note that the
absence of necessity is also expressed by the negative form dont have to (both in present and
past forms), though usually discussed under the notion of absence of obligation as we shall see
later. Note that the use of need is not as common as the other two verbs since it may be both
an auxiliary and ordinary verb.
Yet, the verb need as an auxiliary verb, far from denoting necessity, it implies obligation
and is seldom used in the affirmative except when a negative or interrogative sentence is
22/ 33
preceded by an expression which changes the negative or interrogative verb into an affirmative
(i.e. I dont suppose I need wear a coat = I neednt wear a coat). It is however sometimes used
in fairly formal English with the frequency adverbs hardly, scarcely, only (i.e. You need only
touch one bottom to start watching the video). However, need actually means require as an
ordinary verb and takes the normal regular forms, but no continuous tense. Moreover it is
usually used with an infinitive (i.e. You need to know the exact size to buy him a shirt)
(Eastwood, 1999).
Similarly and meaning but not in form, must and have to also indicate that something is
necessary (i.e. Shell finish school soon so she must think about her future / Were very busy at
the shop. We have to work on Sunday morning too). When we use the past, or the future with
will, we need a form of have to (i.e. Agatha will have to/had to do a lot of work) and also in
other structures such as to-infinitive (i.e. She doesnt want to have to wait for such a long time);
after a modal verb (i.e. He has a sore throat. He may have to go to the doctors); and with
present perfect (i.e. Stephen has had to drive all the way up to North Spain alone).
However, when used in the negative form, we find differences in meaning. For instance,
mustnt means that something is a bad idea (i.e. You mustnt drop the soup) whereas neednt
indicates that something is not necessary (i.e. You neednt apologize for being late). Similarly,
dont have to and dont need to indicate that something is not necessary (i.e. You dont have
to/dont need to do the washing up tonight). Moreover, compare with must not when it
expresses a negative obligation imposed by the speaker or very emphatic advice (i.e. You
mustnt say this to anyone) (Thomson & Martinet, 1986).
The form neednt can be used for present and future. It has the same for all persons. As stated
before, need not far from expressing absence of necessity, it expresses absence of obligation
or the notion of not being necessary. That means the speaker gives permission for an action
not to be performed or sometimes merely states that an action is not necessary (i.e. You neednt
make so many copies. One will do/ You neednt change your colour hair. I like you just the way
you are).
In the past, we use the structure neednt + perfect infinitive to express an unnecessary action
which was nevertheless performed (i.e. You neednt have given me so many presents = thus
spending so much money). If we compare this structure with those of didnt have/need (to do)
we observe that the latter express no obligation, and therefore no action (i.e. I didnt have to
translate that difficult passage from Latin to English).
So when neednt + perfect infinitive is compared with other forms, we find (1) neednt + perfect
infinitive vs. didnt need to and (2) neednt + perfect infinitive vs. could/should + perfect
infinitive. Regarding the former, didnt need to refers to something that was not necessary and
therefore, no action took place (i.e. We didnt need to hurry. We had lots of time) although
sometimes the action did take place even though it was not necessary (i.e. We didnt need to
hurry, but we drove at high speed). However, neednt + perfect infinitive indicates something
we did which we now know was not necessary (i.e. We neednt have hurried because anyway
we arrived late).
23/ 33
Secondly, when compared with could/should + perfect infinitive there is also a difference in
meaning. For instance, when we use could/should + perfect infinitive we imply criticism (i.e.
You shouldnt have gone to that concert = It was wrong, foolish or dangerous) whereas with
neednt + perfect infinitive we do not (i.e. You neednt have gone to that concert).
4.4.1.6. Obligation: must, have to , need.

As stated before, apart from denoting necessity, the forms must, have to and need also express
the notion of obligation in their affirmative (i.e. I must/have to/need go to the doctors) and,
more specifically , in their interrogative forms (i.e. Must I/do I have to/Need I go to the
doctors?). Note that their negative forms have different meanings, for instance, mustnt means
something is prohibited, dont have to means absence of obligation and finally, neednt
means absence of necessity.
Following Snchez Benedito (1975), the subtle difference in meaning between must and have
to is so insignificant that in everyday speech it is never taken into account and both forms are
used indistinctively (i.e. You must/have to come at six oclock tomorrow). However, Thomson
& Martinet (1986) and some more grammarians claim that both verbs show relevant differences
depending on the person who speaks, that is, first, second or third person singular and the rest of
persons in affirmative sentences.
Thus, (1) the general dichotomy must vs. have to in first person examples shows that the
difference is almost insignificant and very often either for m is possible (i.e. I must/have to buy
some butter). Generally, must expresses obligation imposed by the speaker (i.e. A boy says: I
must tidy up my room) whereas have to expresses external obligation (i.e. Mother to boy: You
have to tidy up your room). Yet, we must take into account that have to is more used for habits
(i.e. I have to do exercise three times a week ) whereas must is better when the obligations are
urgent or seem important to the speaker (i.e. I must tell you a secret).
(2) In second person examples, must shows the speakers authority drawn from family,
professional or any other kind of relationship (i.e. Mother to daughter: You must wear a black
dress tonight=you cant go in jeans to that party/Teacher to student:You must use a dictionary
to do this exercise=you cant do it alone/Doctor to patient: You must eat less fat=or youll get
obesity) whereas have to indicates external authority as fixed and well-known rules to follow
(i.e. You must wear a black dress tonight=at the Presidents party/You must use this
moisturizing cream at night=you will see greater effects in 10 days/You have to arrive in time to
an important job interview).
(3) Furthermore, third person examples show that must is namely used in written orders or
instructions (i.e. Passengers must check in two hours before at the airport/A car must have two
extra rear lamps) whereas we use have to just to state or comment on another persons
obligations (i.e. In this office even the senior staff have to be working by 8.00 am/Theyll have to
send an inspector to investigate the case).
24/ 33
(4) Other cases include all persons in a wide range of different situations. For instance, casual
invitations (i.e. You must come and see us in Madrid); strong authority (i.e. This mess must stop
now!); suggestions (i.e. You must write to Anthony and thank him for his present); notices or
advertisements (i.e. Everything must go!=Closing down sale ); and so on.
Similarly, for affirmative obligations in the past, we use had to and in this case, the distinction
between the speakers authority and external authority cannot be expressed and there is only one
form (i.e. I had to borrow some money from Chris). With other tenses, we use have to, for
instance, the future with will(i.e. Anne will have to work tonight) and also in other structures
such as to-infinitive (i.e. She didnt have to cook); after a modal verb (i.e. He may have to go to
London); and with present perfect (i.e. Sarah has had to travel alone).
In the interrogative form, both need and must imply that the person addressed is the authority
concerned, that is, when asking for authority (i.e. Need/Must I go?) in opposition to Do I have
to go or Have I got to go? which implies external authority. Moreover, need also implies
that the speaker is hoping for a negative answer (i.e. Need I really go? No, you mustnt).
Other specific verbs referring to obligation are those under examination in next part, that is,
ought to and should. These verbs, apart from denoting advice, can also express the
subjects obligation or duty as in You must/have to/should practise at least three hours a day
or to indicate a correct or sensible action as in This T-shirt is too small. There must/should be
another. One more similarity is that they all can be used in formal notices and on information
sheets (i.e. Candidates must/have to/should be prepared to answer questions on Science).
However, note that there are relevant differences in use, such as that they do not show neither
the speakers authority as with must or external authority as with have to but a matter of
conscience or good sense. Another difference between ought to/should vs. must/have to is that
with must and have to we have the general impression that the obligation is being fulfilled or
that it will be soon whereas with ought/should it is the opposite. This often happens with the
first person but quite often applies to the other persons too (i.e. I ought/should go slowly here
=but he is not going to go slowly vs. I must/have to go slowly here =he is really intended to go
slowly).
4.4.1.7. Advice: ought to, should, had better, be supposed to.

Generally, we use ought to, should, had better and be supposed to to express advice,
convenience or supposit ion although, as seen above, ought to and should may express
obligation sometimes. First of all, should and ought to imply advice and are used to say
what is the best thing or the right thing to do with no difference in meaning (i.e. You look pale.
Perhaps you should/ought to see a doctor). However, they are often compared but the only
relevant difference we find is drawn from their syntactic structure and everyday use, for
instance, first, ought is followed by to-infinitive whereas should is not and secondly, ought
to is less frequent in everyday speech than should.
25/ 33
Should, apart from denoting advice has another important use, such as being a conditional
auxiliary (i.e. Id like a cup of tea=I should like/I would like). Among other less frequent uses,
we find the subjunctive tense (i.e. It is unnecessary that he should get worried) which is turned
into another structure in everyday speech, thus Its unnecessary for him to get worried;
casuality (i.e. If you should see her, tell her she is wrong); formal instructions (i.e. This bread
should be heated in the oven); suppositions (i.e. He should be here by now, I think); rethoric
questions (i.e. How should I know?); and direct and indirect speech (i.e. Shall I go?- He asked if
he should go).
On the other hand, had better + bare infinitive indicates convenience and is used to say what
is the best thing to do in a situation (i.e. Its cold. You had better wear a coat). Actually, we
could also use should and ought to in this example but had better has a stronger reference
to convenient decisions. In addition, be supposed to indicates supposition and is used when
we are talking about the normal or correct way of doing things (i.e. How am I supposed to live
without you?).
4.4.1.8. Suggestions, offers and invitations: can, could, shall, will, would .
In English, suggestions, offers and invitations are namely expressed by can, could, shall, will
and would. First of all, suggestions are generally given by can, could and more specifically
by shall , for instance, to ask for a suggestion we may use can and shall (i.e. What can/shall
I get Tom for his birthday?) and even should (i.e. Ill tell you how you should do it). Similarly,
we may use could (i.e. We could invite a few friends for our party on Saturday) but the most
usual way of making a suggestion is by means of Shall I + infinitive?(=Lets + infinitive) for
first person suggestions (i.e. Shall I close the window? ) and Shall we+infinitive?(=Why dont
we...?) for second person suggestions (i.e. Shall we go to the theatre tonight?).
Offers are on the other hand expressed by will or can to offer to do something 10 (i.e. Ill take
your luggage/We can take it home). Also, we can use question forms with shall or can (i.e.
Shall we give you the presents now?/Can we give you our presents now?). Moreover, to offer
food or drink, we use would like (i.e. Would you like a drink?) or Will/Wont you have...?
(i.e. Will you have a spare pen?). Note that in informal speech we can use the imperative (i.e.
Have a taste Oh, thanks). On the contrary, if we want to refuse the offer, we would use
wont as a way of strong refusal (i.e. I wont listen to you any more).
Finally, invitations are namely expressed by would and similar verbs used in offers of food
and drink, as seen above. For instance, Would you like to have dinner with us tonight? Or Will
you join us tonight? Similarly, we may use the imperative mood to invite someone in informal
speech, for instance, Come and see us soon or Please, take a sit.
26/ 33
4.4.1.9. Predictions: will, would.

Predictions are mainly expressed by will and would, for instance, we use will for future
predictions (i.e. I guess she will be tired tomorrow. We have been running for two hours)
whereas we use would for a past prediction (i.e. It was so late and Sarah was still working.
She would be really tired the following day) or a prediction about a possible situation (i.e. Will
you join us on Saturday? That would be nice). Note that we can use shall instead of will
and should instead of would, but only in the first person, after I and we (i.e. I will/shall be
thirty on January/We would/should like to meet your husband). Both forms, shall and should
would be considered to be more formal than will and would.
4.4.2. Marginal auxiliaries.

As we know, apart from modal auxiliarie s (i.e. can, could, may, might, must, shall, should and
will) we may find other modals which are considered to be marginal members (dare, need,
ought (to) and used (to)) because they can be used both as auxiliaries and as lexical verbs (i.e.
He needs some friends vs. He neednt be loved), functioning respectively as intransitive or
transitive verbs.
Semantically speaking, when they function as auxiliary verbs, dare namely expresses
indignation (i.e. How dare you?), need expresses obligation (i.e. Need I go to the library?),
ought to expresses obligation or advice (i.e. You ought to go now/You ought to take care of
you), and finally used to expresses a discontinuous habit or a past situation in contrast with
the present (i.e. He used to smoke so much but now he has given up smoking).
On the contrary, when they function as ordinary verbs, they have different meanin gs or in some
cases subtle differences. Thus, dare as an ordinary transitive verb is followed by object + full
infinitive and means challenge but only to deeds requiring courage (i.e. This competitor dared
me to run faster); dare may have idiomatic uses but we shall see in next section. Moreover,
need means require (i.e. I need a computer); ought to stands for the formal way of saying
should (i.e. You ought to start studying soon); and used to is used to express a past routine or
pattern by describing someones routine during a certain period (i.e. Every morning Tom used to
read the newspaper while having breakfast).
Note that is is often used to describe a succession of actions where used to is replaceable by
would but would cannot replace used to for a discontinued habit, as above. We must
remember that used has no present form so we use the present simple for present habits and
routines (i.e. He often reads the newspaper in the morning). In addition, used may function as
an adjective in the structures to be/become/get used to + gerund with the meaning of
accustomed (i.e. I am used to noise/I am used to working in a noisy place) referring to a
psychological statement. Note in the first, used is an adjective and to is a preposition
whereas in the second, used is a verb and to is part of the following verbal form. To finish
10
We must take into account that will may be also used to express instant decisions (i.e. (The phone is
27/ 33
with, we must not confuse these forms with the regular verb to use meaning employ (i.e. I
use my computer to work).
4.4.3. Primary verbs.

When dealing with the semantics of primary verbs, we must address directly to the meaning
they have as ordinary verbs since, as stated before, they are meaningless in their auxiliary
function because they require a participle or infinitive in order to have full meaning. Thus,
following Thomson & Martinet (1986) the main uses of be as an ordinary verb are:
(1) To give personal information about people or things (i.e. I am an architect/New York is
exciting).
(2) to express physical or mental condition (i.e. Tom is being foolish/The children are quiet
today) by means of a wide range of paired adjectives: quiet/noisy, good/bad,
cheap/expensive, generous/mean and so on;
(3) to denote age (i.e. How old is this Scottish castle? Its 600 years old ).
(4) To denote weight and size (i.e. I am 74 kilos and I am 1.76 metres).
(5) To indicate prices (i.e. This car is 60.000 euros).
(6) To be mixed with other constructions such as There is/There are to indicate existence
as an indefinite person or thing (i.e. There is a fireman in the building/There is a fire).
This structure is likely to be confused with that of It is. However, the former is
followed by a noun (singular or plural) (i.e. There is much sun) whereas the latter is
followed by an adjective (i.e. It is sunny).
On the other hand, have as an ordinary verb may mean possess (i.e. My grandma has a
diamond necklace); take (food) (i.e. He always has a cup of coffee at five); and give (a party,
a speech) (i.e. He is having a party next week). Moreover, do namely means perform at the
very moment of speaking (i.e. What are you doing?), as a near future (i.e. What are you doing
tonight?), as a habit (i.e. What does she do at weekends?) or in the past (i.e. What did Markus do
last Friday?). We must not forget that these verbs, as ordinary verbs, may may transitive within
the sentence structure.
Yet, we must highlight their use as idiomatic expressions which are part of our everyday speech.
For instance, be can be used as be + infinitive construction to state a rather impersonal way
of giving instructions and is chiefly used with the third person. This structure is extremely
important to convey orders or instructions (i.e. No one is to leave this room=no one must leave).
Yet, note that it disappears in indirect speech when there is a clause in front of the imperative
(i.e. He told us to wait here).
ringing) Ill answer it) as a way of expressing an offer (i.e. Ill wait for you if you dont mind).
28/ 33
4.4.4. Other types of auxiliaries.

When dealing with the semantics of other types of auxiliary verbs , we shall namely deal with
semi-auxiliaries (be able to, be about to, be due to, and so on), catenative verbs (go on
(talking), keep (on) (smoking), and so on) and modal idioms (had better, would rather, and
so on). Because of their specific syntactic features, their meaning is more related to everyday
use than to merely the semantic field, so we shall analyse them in the following section on
everyday usage.
4.5. On use: everyday usage and idiomatic expressions.

When dealing with modal and auxiliary verbs in everyday use, we cover the field of specific
structures used in everyday speech and idiomatic expressions as fixed sentences in
informal/formal speech. For instance, the idiomatic meaning of Shall I take your bags? as an
offer instead of referring to future; Would you like something to eat? as and invitation and not a
conditional verbal form; May I come in? as a way of asking for permission rather than
possibility; or asking for information Could you tell me the way to the airport, please?.
Yet, everyday usage is clearly expressed by certain types of auxiliaries, such as semi-auxiliaries,
and catenative verbs whereas idiomatic expressions are particularly drawn by modal idioms
because of their specific syntactic structures. Thus, semi-auxiliaries are defined as a set of verb
idioms, for instance, be able to meaning capable of doing anything (i.e. I am able to run 20
kilometres in an hour); be about to meaning close to doing something (i.e. I was just about to
get asleep in the meeting); be going to meaning the intention of doing something soon (i.e. I
was going to call you but you called before); be likely to meaning it is probable that (i.e. She
is likely to win next Olympic Games), and so on.
On the other hand, catenative verbs have meanings similar to those for the aspectual and modal
auxiliaries through such items as appear to, seem to and happen to. Note that some
catenatives are followed by the nonfinite forms ing or ed participles rather than by infinitives,
for instance, start (working), go on (talking), keep (on) (smoking), get (dressed).
And finally, modal idioms are those that comprise a long list of idiomatic expressions which
have no literal translation but idiomatic use. Thus, had better meaning It is better for you to...
(i.e. Youd better go now or he will get angrier); would rather meaning prefer (i.e. He would
rather drink wine than beer=He prefers wine to beer); have got to meaning obligation (i.e.
Hes got to sit two exams in one week); and be to which was explained above, as a means to
convey orders or instructions (i.e. No one is to leave this room=no one must leave).
Moreover, marginal verbs may also have idiomatic meanings, for instance, dare with the
expressions I daresay or I dare say. It presents two different meanings: first, as I suppose (i.e.
I daresay you are pregnant) or second, as I accept what you say (i.e. In England we drive on
the left. Yes, I daresay you do, but in Spain we drive on the right).
29/ 33
5. THE RELEVANCE OF SEMANTIC COOCURRENCE PATTERNS.

So, as we have seen, the principal part of the verb phrase is the lexical or main verb. Since the
lexical verb can occur on its own, but it may also co-occur with auxiliary verbs in patterns of
varying degrees of complexity depending on the semantic feature we intend to express, that is,
tense (verbal tense), aspect (progressive or perfect) or mood (indicative, subjunctive,
imperative). Hence, thanks to the combination of all these paradigms, we get all the verbal
forms we know today.
We may find two co-occurrence patterns in the English verb phrase, thus a lexical verb + one or
a lexical verb + two or more auxiliaries, out of which many grammarians distinguish a high
number of tenses when grammatically examined (up to thirty two tenses). Thus, the possibility
lexical verb + one auxiliary mainly depends on the meaning of the second element and from
which we may find six main possibilities. For instance, it may be (a) a modal auxiliary (i.e. John
can swim); (b) an auxiliary with do 11 which may convey periphrasis (i.e. Does John swim?) or
(c) an auxiliary with do which conveys emphasis (i.e. John does swim); (d) the auxiliary
have for the perfective aspect (i.e. John has swum); (e) the auxiliary be for the progressive
aspect (i.e. John is swimming); and again (f) the auxilia ry be for the use of passive voice (i.e. A
car was bought by John).
Regarding the second possibility, a lexical verb + two or more auxiliaries, it can range in
complexity from three to maximally five verbal forms, including the lexical verb. Thus, with
two auxiliaries (i.e. may have bought, may be buying, may be bought, has been buying, has been
bought, is being bought); with three auxiliaries (i.e. may have been buying, may have been
bought, may be being bought, has been being bought); and finally, with four auxiliaries +
lexical verb (i.e. may have been being bought) although this type is quite rare.
In those verb phrases which contain a combination of these categories, the suffix is invariably
attached to the verb immediately following the auxiliary which, together with the suffix, realizes
the category in question. It is worth remembering at this point that if there is only one verb in
the verb phrase, it is the main verb (i.e. He believes in ghosts). On the other hand, if there is
more than one verb, the final one is the main verb, and the one or more verbs that come before it
are auxiliaries (i.e. The e-mail has been being (auxiliaries) written (main verb)).
6. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS.
The different verbal paradigms dealt with in this study are so relevant to the learning of a
foreign language since differences between the vocabulary related to modal verbs of the
learner's native language (L1) and that of the foreign language (L2) may lead to several
problems, such as the incorrect use of verbal tenses, especially because of the syntactic,
morphological, and semantic processes implied in these categories.
30/ 33
This study has looked at the structure of the auxiliary verb phrase in terms of form and function,
that is, regarding morphological and phonological forms and syntactic and semantic functions,
all those related by the relevance of usage in everyday speech. This study is mainly intended for
teachers to help Spanish-speaking students establish a relative similarity between the two
languages that would find it useful for communicating in the European framework we are living
in nowadays.
According to Thomson & Martinet (1986), a European student may find especially troublesome
the use of verbal tenses, and particularly modal and auxiliary verbs, when communicating in
English since, first, he has to know the specific constructions a verb needs or not (i.e. I must go /
I musnt go / He must have gone) and, second, which modal verb to use when certain situations
are given depending on the context (possibility, deduction, advice, obligation, and so on) and on
top of that, how to place adverbs in this type of structures (i.e. He can often play chess).
This choice becomes problematic for our Spanish students when they deal with the wide range
of modal and auxiliary verbs and their semantic offer. For instance, the most common mistakes
for Spanish students, both at ESO and Bachillerato level, is to construct the negative and
interrogative forms of English modal verbs as the ordinary verbs do (i.e. Does she be able to
pay her debts?) or to place adverbs within the sentence with a nearby modal verb (i.e. He never
must come alone) or sometimes by omitting certain elements (i.e. She is used to sing in
contests). Often, they make serious grammatical mistakes.
It has been suggested that a methodology grounded in part in the application of explicit
linguistic knowledge enhances the second language learning process. In the Spanish curriculum
(B.O.E. 2002), the use of modal and auxiliary verbs is envisaged from earlier stages of ESO in
the use of simple modal verbs (can, must, should) to talk about their everyday life or any
specific topic, up to higher stages of Bachillerato, towards more complex verbal forms, such as
modal verbs + perfective infinitive for deductio ns (i.e. He must have gone out. No one answers
the phone at home) , past habits (i.e. He got used to + gerund) and above all, idiomatic
expressions in certain modal idioms (i.e. Id rather stay with you tonight).
So, the importance of how to handle these modal verbs cannot be understated since you can
communicate but not successfully because of the relevant distinction of meaning between can
and may or the way of asking for things. We must not forget that Spanish students are likely to
use the imperative form to ask for things rather than using structures such as Can I use the
phone?, Could you tell me the way to the gym?, Shall I copy this? and so on.
Current communicative methods foster the teaching of this kind of specific linguistic
information to help students recognize the main differences with the L2 words. Learners cannot
do it all on their own. Language learners, even 2nd year Bachillerato students, do not
automatically recognize similiarities which seem obvious to teachers; learners need to have
these associations brought to their attention.
11
This structure with do cannot contain a modal auxiliary nor an auxiliary of the perfective aspect, the progressive
31/ 33
So far, we have attempted in this discussion to provide a broad account of modal and auxiliary
verbs by means of form, function and use within verb phrase morphology, phonology, syntax,
semantics and usage in order to set it up within the linguistic theory, going through the
localization of modal verbs in syntactic structures, to a broad presentation of the main
grammatical categories involved in it. We hope students are able to understand the rele vance of
handling correctly the expression of modal verbs to successfully communicate in everyday life.
7. CONCLUSION.
All in all, although the question What is an auxiliary verb? may appear simple and
straightforward, it implies a broad description of the modal verb structure in terms of form,
function and use so as to get to the paradigms of morphology, phonology, syntax, semantics and
use which, combined, give way to the study we have presented here. The appropriate answer
suitable for students and teachers, may be so simple if we are dealing with ESO students, using
simple modal verbs or so complex if we are dealing with Bachillerato students, who must be
able to handle more complex verb structures.
So far, in this study we have attempted to take a fairly broad view of auxiliary verbs since we
are also assuming that there is an intrinsic connexion between its learning and successful
communication. Yet, we have provided a descriptive account of Unit 20 dealing with Auxiliary
and modal verbs whose main aim was to introduce the student to the different paradigms that
shape the whole set of verbal forms in English regarding their form and function.
In doing so, the study provided a broad account these notions, starting by a theoretical
framework in order to get some key terminology on the issue, and further developed within a
grammar linguistic theory, described in morphological, phonological, syntactic, semantic and
usage terms. Once presented, we discussed each paradigm individually but always in relation to
each other not to lose track of it.
In fact, the correct expression of auxiliary verbs (modal and primary), is currently considered to
be a central element in communicative competence and in the acquisition of a second language
since students must be able to use and distinguish these forms in their everyday life in many
different situations. As stated before, the teaching of them comprises four major components in
our educational curriculum: phonology, grammar, lexicon, and semantics, out of which we get
five major levels: phonological, morphological and syntactic, lexical, and semantic.
Therefore, it is a fact that students must be able to handle the four levels in communicative
competence in order to be effectively and highly communicative in the classroom and in real
life situations , now we are part of the European Union. The expression of these verbal
paradigms in form and function, proves highly frequent in our everyday speech, and
consequently, we must encourage our students to have a good managing of it.
aspect or the passive voice. However, negative imperatives are an exception (i.e. Dont be taken in).
32/ 33
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
- Aarts, F., and J. Aarts. 1988. English Syntactic Structures. Functions & Categories in Sentence Analysis.
Prentice Hall Europe.
- B.O.E. RD N 112/2002, de 13 de septiembre por el que se establece el currculo de la Educacin
Secundaria Obligatoria/Bachillerato en la Comunidad Autnoma de la Regin de Murcia.
- Bolton, D. And N. Goodey. 1997. Grammar Practice in Context. Richmond Publishing.
- Council of Europe (1998) Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European
Framework of reference.
- Eastwood, J. 1999. Oxford Practice in Grammar. Oxford University Press.
- Greenbaum, S. and R. Quirk. 1990. A Students Grammar of the English Language. Longman Group
UK Limited.
- Greenbaum, S. 2000. The Oxford Reference Grammar. Edited by Edmund Weiner. Oxford University
Press.
- Huddleston, R. 1988. English Grammar, An Outline. Cambridge University Press.
- Huddleston, R. and G.K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge
University Press.
- Nelson, G. 2001. English: An Essential Grammar. London. Routledge.
- Quirk, R & S. Greenbaum. 1973. A University Grammar of English. Longman.
- Snchez Benedito, F. 1975. Gramtica Inglesa. Editorial Alhambra.
- Thomson, A.J. and A.V. Martinet. 1986. A Practical English Grammar. Oxford University Press.
33/ 33

20 Ok

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

20 Ok

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

UNIT 20

AUXILIARY AND MODAL VERBS: FORM AND

A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR AUXILIARY VERBS.

3. A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO AUXILIARY VERBS: PRIMARY AND MODAL.

MAIN STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF AUXILIARY VERBS: FORM AND FUNCTION.

4.4.1.7. Advice: ought to, should, had better, be supposed to.

THE RELEVANCE OF CO-OCCURRENCE PATTERNS.

1.2. Notes on bibliography.

A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR AUXILIARY VERBS.

2.1. Linguistic levels involved.

usual description of a language comprises four major components: phonology, grammar,

2.2. Grammar categories involved: open vs. closed classes.

2.3. Major verb classes involved: lexical vs. auxiliary verbs.

2.4. The closed class of auxiliary verbs: what and how.

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO AUXILIARY VERBS: PRIMARY AND MODAL.

3.1. The historical source of auxiliary verbs.

3.1.1. Main phonological and morphological changes.

3.1.2. Syntactic tendencies in ME verb phrases.

3.2. A classification of auxiliary verbs.

3.3. Modal vs. primary auxiliaries: main differences.

4. MAIN STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF AUXILIARY VERBS: FORM AND FUNCTION.

4.1. On form: morphological features.

4.1.1. Modal auxiliaries.

4.1.2. Primary auxiliaries.

4.2. On pronunciation: phonological features.

4.2.1. Modal auxiliaries.

4.2.2. Primary auxiliaries.

4.3. On function: syntactic features.

4.3.1. Main syntactic constructions.

4.3.2. Simple and complex verb phrases.

4.3.3. General features of auxiliary verbs as operators.

4.3.4. Specific features of auxiliary verbs as lexical verbs.

4.3.5. Other specific types of verbs: syntactic function.

4.4. On semantics: meaning.

4.4.1. Modal auxiliaries.

4.4.1.1. Ability: can, could , be able to.

4.4.1.2. Permission: can, may, could, be allowed to .

4.4.1.3. Possibility: may, might, can, could .

4.4.1.4. Impossibility, certainty and deduction: cant, must.

4.4.1.5. Necessity: must, have to , neednt.

4.4.1.6. Obligation: must, have to , need.

4.4.1.7. Advice: ought to, should, had better, be supposed to.

4.4.1.9. Predictions: will, would.

4.4.2. Marginal auxiliaries.

4.4.3. Primary verbs.

4.4.4. Other types of auxiliaries.

4.5. On use: everyday usage and idiomatic expressions.

5. THE RELEVANCE OF SEMANTIC COOCURRENCE PATTERNS.

S-ar putea să vă placă și