We used to live in England. We would play at school.
My question is: In the examples,
Nancy would shock people in the '60s.
Her father would be proud of her.
How do you know when the second sentence happened? Now? In the 60?...
2012-11-13
Would...
After all my life thinking that would express condition, in sentences like If I were you, I would go to the dentist, this days I was told that would can also express habit in the past, with a similar meaning to used to, but with a little diference; the former form implies that the habit wasn't continue, the later implies that the habit is continue.
We used to live in England. We would play at school.
My question is: In the examples,
Nancy would shock people in the '60s.
Her father would be proud of her.
How do you know when the second sentence happened? Now? In the 60?...
We used to live in England. We would play at school.
My question is: In the examples,
Nancy would shock people in the '60s.
Her father would be proud of her.
How do you know when the second sentence happened? Now? In the 60?...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OK, Ivan, this is a tough one... I would almost always read "Her father would be proud of her." as a conditional tense, but if I really try hard, I can think of it with the habitual sense. Maybe part of it is that it's hard to "be proud" habitually. "Her father would approve" is easier for me to interpret with the habitual sense.
ReplyDeleteI think the answer to the ambiguity is context. I can't recall a time when I was confused by this.
But let me "muddy the waters"... There's another usage of "would". These two sentences mean exactly the same thing:
1. Yesterday he said to me, "I will definitely go the party."
2. Yesterday he told me that he would definitely go to the party.
In this case "would" is the past version of the future tense. At least I think so.
How would you say these in Spanish?
1. Ayer me dijo, "Iré sin duda a la fiesta."
2. Ayer me dijo que ???? sin duda a la fiesta. Vaya? Fuera?
1.- Ayer me dijo que iría a la fiesta.
Delete2.- Ayer me dijo que sin duda iría a la fiesta.
The same.
I don't understand the sense of past of these sentences:
1. Yesterday he said to me, "I will definitely go the party."
2. Yesterday he told me that he would definitely go to the party.
In this case "would" is the past version of the future tense. At least I think so.
The difference betwen used to + inf and would as a tense past, is would means the action was repeated several times in the past. It's the only thing that I understand.
Difficult!
ReplyDeleteI don't really see any difference between these two:
ReplyDeleteIn those days he used to do something.
In those days he would do something.
They both indicate a repeated, habitual action.
If in those days he did something ( every single day) would do. if in those day he used to do something ( e.g some days not all day ) used to do. I thinkt that's the difference. Is it correct Matt?
DeleteI don't think so. I don't think that is the distinction. Let me give it one more try...
Delete"I used to ride my bike a lot." This means that, in the past, I rode my bike a lot, maybe every day, maybe not. But it also emphasizes that I do not now ride my bike a lot.
"In those days I would ride my bike a lot." Notice the "In those days" -- I think we usually have some kind of past indication like this when we use the "would" construction. This also means that, in the past, I rode my bike a lot, maybe every day, maybe not. But it doesn't really say anything about today.
In other words, the "used to" construction identifies a customary action from the past that is clearly discontinued, while the "would" construction identifies a customary action from the past, but does not say whether the action continues or not.
Ahora sé claramente porqué no llegué a ser profesor de inglés!