Автор работы: Пользователь скрыл имя, 25 Мая 2013 в 14:59, реферат
The speaker’s judgment may be of different kinds, that is, the speaker may express various modal meanings. Modal verbs unlike other verbs, do not denote actions or states, but only show the attitude of the speaker towards the action expressed by the infinitive in combination with which they form compound modal predicates. These modal verbs may show that the action (or state, of process, or quality) is viewed by the speaker as possible, obligatory, doubtful, certain, permissible, advisable, requested, prohibited, ordered etc. Modal verbs occur only with the infinitive. This or that meaning is to a great degree determined by communicative type of the sentence and the form of the infinitive. That is a huge problem for foreign learners of English, who make a great deal of mistakes in this field. So, the aim of my work is to show how modal verbs can be used, in what case we need one or other verb and why.
Must has the following meanings:
E.g. Any real body must have extension in four directions: it must have Length, Breadth, Thickness, and – Duration.
In different contexts must may acquire additional shades of meaning, such as duty or necessity.
In this meaning must is found in affirmative and interrogative sentences and followed only by the simple infinitive.
E.g. He must not leave his room for a while. (Он не должен (ему нельзя) выходить из комнаты некоторое время).
This meaning is expressed in negative sentences and must is also followed by the simple infinitive.
E.g. You must come and see us when you’re in London.
You must stop worrying about your son.
You mustn’t give another thought to what he said.
You mustn’t miss the film. It is very interesting.
You must have your hair cut.
It is much too long. You mustn’t cry.
“Andy” – she spoke in a quick, low voice – “of course you must never tell anybody what I told you about Canby yesterday.” (F. Scott Fitzgerald)
This meaning is found in affirmative and negative sentences and is closely connected with the two above mentioned meanings.
E.g. Watson, we must look upon you as a man of letters.
It must be late as the streets are deserted.
Must in this meaning is found only in affirmative sentences. In Russian this meaning is generally rendered by means of the attitudinal adverbs вероятно, должно быть.
In English this meaning may also be expressed by means of the attitudinal adverb probably.
In this meaning must may be followed by different forms of the infinitive. If reference is made to the present, the Continuous infinitive is used with dynamic verbs.
E.g. The book is not on the shelf. Jane must be reading it. Let’s have something to eat. You must be starving.
If must is followed by the simple infinitive of dynamic verbs, it expresses obligation.
E.g. Jane must read the book. You must stay here.
However, with stative verbs the simple infinitive is used to express supposition.
E.g. He must be over fifty.
He must know all about it as he has read a lot on the subject.
“He must be a Southerner, judging by those trousers,” suggested Harry mischievously. (F. Scott Fitzgerald)
Must in combination with the Perfect Infinitive refers the action to the past.
E.g. You must have examined the house very carefully, to find a single pellet of paper.
It must have been his first taste of peace for years.(A. Marshall)
The combination of must with the Perfect Continuous infinitive indicates an action begun in the past and continued into the moment of speaking.
E.g. It must have been raining all the night. There are big puddles in the garden.
However, if must is followed by a stative verb, the Perfect infinitive is used.
E.g. He must have been here since breakfast. He must have known it all along.
When must expresses supposition implying strong probability, its use is restricted in two ways:
E.g. She must really love you to distraction. He must evidently know all about it
Must needs denotes obligation.
E.g. He must needs go there. (Он непременно должен пойти туда.)
“I think you must ask somebody else to your party instead of Henry, Jim” (B. J. Chute)
I must be going and I must be off both mean – it is time for me to go (in Russian – мне пора уходить).
In the sentences: You must come and see me some time You must come and have a dinner with me. You must come to our party. You must come and stay with us for the weekend and the like, the meaning of obligation in must is also weakened. Must has become part of such sentences which are a common way of expressing invitations.
To have to as a modal verb is not a defective verb and can have all the necessary finite forms as well as the verbal.
E.g. He is an invalid and has to have a nurse.
She knew what she had to do.
He frightened her – I had to yield him my last date before Bill came.
I shall have to reconsider my position.
He is always having to exercise judgment.
My impression was that he was having to force himself to talk.
I have had to remind you of writing to her all this time.
The interrogative and negative forms of the modal verb to have to are built up by means of the auxiliary verb to do.
E.g. Why do I have to do everything?
Did he have to tell them about it?
“That is all right,” she said. “I just thought I’d ask. You don’t have to explain.”
There was a grim on his face. He did not have to tell me that he already knew.
The verb to have to serves to express obligation or necessity imposed by circumstances.
It is rendered is Russian as приходится, вынужден.
In this meaning it is found in all kinds of sentences – affirmative, interrogative and negative – and is combined only with the simple infinitive.
E.g. I am afraid you will have to go to the court.
They will have him back. (Они заставят его вернуться)
Did he have to do it? He did not have to do it.
In negative sentences to have to denotes absence of necessity.
E.g. You don’t have to go there. (Вам нет необходимости идти туда).
You mustn’t go there. (Вам нельзя идти туда).
In spoken English the meaning of obligation and necessity is also expressed by have (has) got to. Like the verb to have to it is found in all kinds of sentences and is combined with the simple infinitive.
E.g. He has got to go right now.
Has he got to go right now?
He hasn't got to go just yet.
Had better is followed by the infinitive without to.
We can compare the usage of this verb in American and British literature:
You’ve got to be kidding – American English.
You’ve got to be joking – British English.
To be to as a modal verb is used in the present and past tenses.
E.g. We are to meet at six.
We were to meet at six.
To be to as a modal verb has the following meanings:
E.g. We are to discuss it the following week.
Is he to arrive tomorrow?
Who was to speak at the meeting?
This meaning of to be to is found in affirmative and interrogative sentences in the present and past tenses. To be to is followed by the simple infinitive.
The past tense of the verb to be to in combination with the Perfect infinitive denotes an unfulfilled plan.
E.g. I promised to go to a club with her last Tuesday, and I really forgot all about it. We were to have played a duet together.
E.g. I just mention it because you said I was to give you all the details I could.
The Prime Minister is to go to Paris next week. (Daily Worker, London)
E.g. He did not know at the time that he was never to see his native place again.
How was I to know that I was going to meet a raging beauty?
This meaning of to be to is rendered in Russian as “суждено”. It is mainly found in the past tense and its application is limited to narration. It occurs in affirmative and negative sentences and is followed by the simple infinitive.
E.g. Her father was often to be seen in the bar of the Hotel Metropole.
Where is he to be found?
Nothing was to be done under the circumstances.
Responsibilities and obligations possessed by the Soviet trade unions are to be envied. (Morning Star)
In this meaning to be to is equivalent to can or may. It is used in all kinds of sentences in the present and past tenses and is followed by the passive infinitive.
The modal verb ought to has only one form which is used “with reference to the present of future. In reported speech it remains unchanged. Ought is always followed by the infinitive with to.
Ought to has the following meanings:
E.g. You ought to say a word or two about yourself.
Ought she to warn him?
He oughtn’t to mention it to anybody.
Generally ought to refers an action to the future and is followed by the simple infinitive. With reference to the present ought to is used with the continuous infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.
E.g. At your age you ought to be earning your living.
You ought to feel some respect for your elders.
In combination with the perfect infinitive ought to in the affirmative form shows that a desirable action was no fulfilled.
E.g. You ought to have chosen a more suitable time to tell me this news.
In the negative form ought to in combination with the Perfect Infinitive shows that an undesirable action was fulfilled
E.g. I’m sorry. I ought to have said it.
You oughtn’t to have married her, David. It was a great mistake.
E.g. The new sanatorium ought to be very comfortable.
In modern English the modal meaning of obligation in shall is always combined with the function of an auxiliary verb of the future tense.
Shall is still used to express obligation with the second and third persons, but at present it is not common in this meaning in spoken English. Its use, as a rule, is restricted to formal or even archaic style and mainly found in subordinate clauses, i.e. it is structurally dependent.
E.g. It has been decided that the proposal shall not be opposed.
At present, however, this meaning of obligation, somewhat modified, is found with the second and third persons in sentences expressing promise, threat or warning. It is used in affirmative and negative sentences and combined with the simple infinitive.
E.g. You shall have my answer tomorrow.
He shall do as I say.
The meaning of obligation may also be traced in interrogative sentences where shall is used with the first and third persons to ask after the will of the person addressed. In this case it is also followed by the simple infinitive.
E.g. Shall I get you some fresh coffee, Miss Flour?
Who shall answer the telephone, Major?
Sentences of this kind are usually rendered in Russian with the help of the infinitive: Принести Вам ещё кофе? Кому отвечать по телефону? etc.
In modern English the modal verb should is used with reference to the present or future. It remains unchanged in reported speech.
Should has the following meanings:
E.g. It’s late. You should go to bed.
You shouldn’t miss the opportunity.
Should I talk to him about it?
Should may be combined with the Perfect Infinitive. In this case the meaning of the combination depends on whether the sentence is affirmative or negative. In an affirmative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive indicates that a desirable action was not carried out.
E.g. He looks very ill. He should have stayed at home.
He should have told me about it himself.
In a negative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive serves to show that an undesirable action was carried out.
E.g. Oh, John, you shouldn’t have done as you did.
They shouldn’t have concealed it from us.
E.g. The film should be very good as it is starring first-class actors.
The use of should in this case does not seem to be very common as this meaning is usually rendered by must.
In addition to the above mentioned cases showing the independent use of should this verb occurs in certain object clauses where it depends on the lexical character of the predicate verb in the principal clause and in adverbial clauses of condition, purpose and concession.
E.g. “It’s important,” I broke out, “that the people should know what we’ve just heard.”
Should may have a peculiar function - it may be used for emotional coloring. In this function it may be called the emotional should. The use of the emotional should is structurally dependent.
It is found in the following cases:
E.g. Why should I do it? (С какой стати я буду это делать?)
E.g. I don’t know why he should want to see him (Я не знаю зачем он ему нужен)
E.g. There is no reason why they shouldn’t get on very well together (Нет причины почему бы им не ладить друг с другом).
E.g. The door opened and who should come in but Tom (Дверь открылась, и, кто бы Вы думали, вошёл? Никто иной, как Том)
E.g. I went into business with her as her partner. Why shouldn’t I have done it? (Почему бы мне не сделать это?
E.g. I‘m sorry that you should think so badly of me (Мне жаль, что Вы так плохо обо мне думаете).
He was little surprise that Ann should speak so frankly about it.
The rules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here. The Perfect infinitive is used to show that the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause.
E.g. He was annoyed that they should have asked him that.
E.g. It is absurd that such things should happen to a family like theirs (Нелепо, чтобы такие вещи случались в такой семье, как их).
E.g. That it should come to this! (И до чего дело дошло!)
To think that it should come to this! (Подумать только, до чего дело дошло!)
To think that it should have happened to me! (Подумать только, что это произошло со мной!)
The verb will has the following forms: will – the present tense and would – the past tense. The latter form is used in two ways:
Will and would may also be used as verbs of full predication (not modal verbs). Will may be used as a regular verb (wills, willed). It means проявлять волю, заставлять, внушать. Would s a defective verb. It is used with reference to the present and means “ желать”. It is found mainly in poetry and like the verb to wish is followed by an object clause: I would I were a careless child.
While shall and should are treated as two different verbs in modern English, will and would are considered to be the forms of the same verb, its original meaning being that of volition (Volition is a general term which includes such meanings as willingness, readiness, consent, intention and determination to perform an action). However, in some of their meanings the use of will is parallel only to would which denotes an actual fact in the past; in other meanings will is found alongside would which expresses unreality in the present or serves as a milder or more polite form of will.
The use of will and would which denotes an actual fact in the past is parallel in the following cases:
E.g. She will (would) sit for hours under the old oak tree looking at the beautiful country around her (…любит/любила сидеть, обычно сидит/сидела …)
In addition to indicating an habitual action, will (would) in this case implies willingness, personal interest on the part of the doer of the action. Will (would) in this meaning is found in affirmative sentences and is followed by he simple infinitive.
In present-time context will in this meaning is not common. In past-time context would is mainly characteristic of literary style.
E.g. Then there were weekends when he would ride over to the house of one farmer or another and spend a couple of nights on the hills.
E.g. The doctor knows I won’t be operated on.
This meaning is found in negative sentences; will (would) is followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually rendered as никак не хочу, ни за что не хотел.
E.g. The door won’t (wouldn’t) open.
In this meaning will (would) is found in negative sentences and is followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually rendered as никак не открывается (не открывалась) and the like.