To give the quotation in my previous post some context, Michael Lewis presents it in a book which otherwise sets out to show that we *can* simplify descriptions of English grammar in a useful way (i.e. it's not as complicated or difficult as some like to claim).
A question that Michael Lewis asks is whether or not HAVE TO is a modal verb. I suppose this means we need a definition for modal verbs. If MUST is a modal verb, what makes it a modal verb? How can we recognise it as a modal verb?
There seems to be a general consensus that the following verbs are all modals: can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would. Ron Cowan, for example, refers to these 9 as "pure modals".
In what way(s) might HAVE TO be different to the verbs in this list?
No comments:
Post a Comment