You are on page 1of 155

http://reallifeglobal.

com/gonna-gotta-wanna/
How Native Speakers Connect Their Words: Gonna, Wanna, Gotta (Video) - See more at:
http://reallifeglobal.com/gonna-gotta-wanna/#sthash.oK4ZynNv.dpuf
Are you confused about how and when to use the words GONNA, WANNA, and GOTTA
in English? Have you heard different things from different people about the
appropriateness of these words?
While a lot of conventional teachers and programs teach that its wrong or inappropriate
to use these colloquial contractions when speaking English in formal situations, gonna,
wanna, and gotta are perfectly okay to use in all spoken situations, both formal and
informal. This is simply how native speakers communicate.
- See more at: http://reallifeglobal.com/gonna-gotta-wanna/#sthash.oK4ZynNv.dpuf

Gonna
Ok, to start with, we have going to in the simple future. So, going to, the simple
construction is going to + verb. So, Im going to go to the movies, Im going to play
soccer. This becomes gonna. Im gonna play soccer, Im gonna go to the movies.
This is very common, especially in American English, but in other forms of English as
well.

Common mistakes with Gonna


So, a couple of mistakes people make with this. The first one is they dont use the to be,
so they say I gonna. But it should be Im gonna.
Second mistake is they often say Im gonna to, but it should be Im going to or Im
gonna. Im gonna play soccer.
And the third mistake is they often confuse the present continuous with gonna. But the
present continuous, even when used in the future, we do not use gonna. So, its only with
the Im going to + verb, in the future. Im gonna play soccer, Im gonna study
English.

Wanna
So, now, wanna. Wanna is want to plus a verb. It can also be a noun as well, but thats a
little bit different. So, for example, I wanna play soccer. I wanna have fun. I wanna
eat dinner.

Wanna with a noun

And then, with a noun, this is actually I want a. I want a new car. I want a book
about this subject.
A common tendency with this is sometimes we take off the subject in the beginning.
So, instead of saying Do you wanna hangout? I might say Wanna hangout? or You
wanna hangout?

Gotta
And the final one is gotta. Gotta comes from Ive got to. Ive got to leave now,
which is like I have to leave now. But we take off the Ive and make it I, as kind of
a colloquial contraction. So, I gotta go now is a common way. I gotta read that book.
More correct would be Ive got to and the correct pronunciation would be Ive gotta
with this. Ive gotta read that book.

Gotta with a noun


And then a lot of times people use this with a noun. So, I got a new car, for example, or
another example of this would be I got a meeting later on today. I got a meeting later
on today.
So, those are the examples of gonna (Im gonna play soccer), wanna (I wanna study
for that test), and gotta (I gotta go or Ive gotta go).

Formal and Informal


So, just on the side notes, these are not all informal contractions. This is connected
speech, the way natives really speak. The way we shrink our words, the way we connect
them, the way we link them.
So, we do this in informal situations and formal situations. So, just to give you an
example of this, Im going to provide you with an interview with Steve Jobs on CNBC,
an financial program from a few years ago, and were just going to show you some
examples of wanna and gonna, just to show you how we use it in formal situations and
even a person like Steve Jobs and even the interviewers do. So

Examples from the CNBC Steve Jobs Interview


And it will completely change your expectations are GONNA be for what you can carry
on your pocket.
I think everything is GONNA be just fine.

Yeah, I dont think the stock actions scandal is GONNA impact this at the end of the day
earnings are GONNA be there.
And if he again puts out the better mousetrap, people are GONNA follow him.
So, there are some nice examples for you with some real people using it on TV in
American culture.

Conclusion
So, that does it for todays lesson. Remember that these are important. Connected speech
with gonna, gotta, wanna. Make sure you know how to understand them and then
play around with it, see if you can use it. And its really gonna help your English flow a
lot.
But thats it for today, thank you for watching, I really enjoyed being here today, make
sure you subscribe, check out the link to the article below and if you want to get a free
ebook from our website, A 101 Words You Wont Learn at School click on the link at
the end.
Thank you very much, take care.
- See more at: http://reallifeglobal.com/gonna-gotta-wanna/#sthash.oK4ZynNv.dpuf

Learning English

gonna, gotta, wanna and dunno

Daniel Haieck from San Luis in Argentina


writes:
I would like to know please under what
circumstances we should use wanna and
gonna, and what exactly they mean. Thank
you.

Roger Woodham replies:

wanna / gonna
Wanna and gonna are frequently used in speech in informal

colloquial English, particularly American English, instead of


want to and going to. You will also see them used in writing in
quotes of direct speech to show the conversational
pronunciation of want to and going to.
Gonna to express the going to form of the future is used with
first second and third person singular and plural. Note that in
the interrogative, are is omitted in second person singular and
first and second person plural

What we gonna do now? (= What are we going to do


now?)
Don't know about you two. I'm gonna put my feet up
and take a break.
We're gonna carry on and try and get there before dark.
What's he gonna wear on his wedding day?
~ I dunno. But he's gonna look real smart.

Wanna can be used with all persons singular and plural, except
third person singular. This is because wanna scans with I want
to, you want to, we want to, they want to, but not with
he/she wants to where the final s is too intrusive:

What you wanna do now? (Instead of: What do you


want to do now?)
I wanna go home. My mum and dad are waiting for me
and they wanna go out.
You'll never give up gambling. I'm sure of that. ~ You
wanna bet?
(which means: Do you want to place a bet on that?)

a wannabee
This term derives originally from the US, but is now used
extensively in British English. A wannabee (literally a wantto-be) is someone who is trying to copy somebody else.
Usually the person they are trying to copy is somebody famous.

Scores of Britney Spears wannabees raided the shops


where she had bought her latest outfit.

gotta
Gotta is used in a similar way to gonna and wanna, in this
case to show the conversational pronunciation of have got to,
or as informal alternatives to have to or must. It is not so
much used in the interrogative:

Don't go out there tonight. It's really dangerous.


~ A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do

I gotta / I've gotta phone home right now. My mum'll be


worried.

You gotta / You've gotta get changed right away. The


match starts in five minutes.

dunno
Dunno, meaning I don't know is characteristic of very informal
speech in British English. Note that the word stress in this
expression is on the second syllable, whereas with gonna,
gotta and wanna it is on the first syllable.

Are you going to college when you leave school? ~


Dunno!

Will you quit your job if they re-locate to Manchester?


~ I dunno.

When to use these expressions


You don't ever need to use these forms actively yourself, Daniel,
as a language learner. They may sound too informal if you do,
although if other native speakers of English around you are
using them, there is probably no reason why you shouldn't use
them too, as you 'grow into them.' It is, of course, important to
recognise and understand them.
Gotta, wanna and gonna in the history of popular music
Gotta, wanna and gonna have been used regularly in the titles
and lyrics or popular songs since the 1950s or even earlier.
If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.
more
questions

Learn It

'have had' and 'had had'


Sabz Ali Khan from Saudi Arabia from Madiini from
Kenya writes:
Sabz: I think it is difficult to use have and had
together in a sentence, e.g.: I have had a headache
since morning. Is this sentence correct?
Madiini: I always get confused with the verb have
when it is repeated, e.g.: I had had... Please help me to
understand when we can use have like this.
Roger Woodham replies:

have had / has had


We typically use have as a main verb with an object to talk
about common actions. There are lots of things that we have in
English, meaning that we enjoy or experience them. For
instance, we can:
have breakfast/lunch/dinner/supper/a bite to eat/a light meal
have a hot or cold drink/a glass of wine/a cup of coffee/some
mineral water
have a shower/a bath/a wash and shave
have a rest/a snooze/a siesta/a good sleep/a bad dream
have a walk/a swim/a good time/a nice evening/a day off/a
holiday/a good journey/a good trip
have a word with someone/a chat/a conversation/a quarrel/an
argument
have a headache/a sore throat/hay fever/a bad back/a bad cold
have a (good) job/some work to do/money/an opportunity/a
chance

We use the present perfect tense when we want to connect the


present with the (recent) past in some way and this will appear
as has had or have had in full forms or as 's had or 've had in
contracted forms:
Have they had their breakfast yet? ~ They've had a glass of
orange juice, but they haven't had anything to eat yet.
He was in a foul mood when he got back, but now that he's had
a shower and a snooze, he's calmed down a bit.
Have you had a nice evening, Barbara? ~ I've had a rotten
evening. I had an argument with Tom and I've had enough for
one day.
Have you always had hay fever? ~ I've had it every summer
since I was 13.
Thus, your example sentence, Sazd, I've had a headache since
early morning, is quite correct.
had had
Had had is the past perfect form of have when it is used as a
main verb to describe our experiences and actions. We use the
past perfect when we are talking about the past and want to refer
back to an earlier past time, Madiini. In these examples, note the
use of before, after, already and by the time as a trigger for the
past perfect. Note also that the contracted form of had had is 'd
had.
She'd had a lot to drink and wasn't capable of walking home by
herself.
After he'd had a good night's sleep, he felt much better.
She sacked him before he had had a chance to explain his
behaviour.
By the time he was twenty he'd already had four different jobs.
I'd already had a word with Joan about re-locating to
Manchester and now she's had time to think about it, she quite
likes the idea.

Note that past perfect forms are a feature of if-clauses in the


third type of conditional sentence when we are explaining past
actions or regretting past inaction. Thus, had had is likely to
appear in this construction:
If I hadn't had a good education, I would never have got this job.
If she had had children later in life, she would have been a better
mother.
If I'd had another ten minutes, I would've finished the
examination paper.
Had they had any savings they didn't need, they would've repaid their son's student loan.
Learning English

must / have to / have got to

Tiggy from Belgium writes:


I would like to know what the difference is
between must and have to?
When should I use one and not the other?

Roger Woodham replies:

must, have to and have got to: expressing the present


Must, have to and have got to are all used to express
obligation or the need to do something.
They can be used interchangeably in the present tense, except
that must suggests that it is the speaker who has decided that
something is necessary, whereas have to and have got to
suggest that somebody else has imposed the decision.
Have got to is characteristic of very informal speech. Have to
sounds slightly more formal.

Compare the following:


I must clean the house before mum gets back. I want
her to find it all neat and tidy.
Sorry, I can't come out now. I've got to tidy up my room
before I'm allowed out.
He has to attend the clinic every two weeks. He's really
quite seriously ill.

You must come and visit us again soon. It's ages since
we saw you.

With frequency adverbs such as always, often, sometimes,


never, etc, have to is normally preferred:
I usually have to work on Saturdays so I hardly ever go
away for the weekend.

They sometimes have to get their own suppers if their


mother is working late.

must and have to: expressing the future and the past
Must and have got to have no future or past tense forms.
We cannot say: I had got to.../ I'll have got to.../ I'll must.../
I've must....
However we can also use must to express future as well as
present intention, especially if it is the speaker who decides
that something is necessary. But it cannot be used to express
past intention.
Have to is the only one of the three that possesses past and
future forms.

Compare the following:

To get to Leeds by ten, I shall have to leave London


before six tomorrow.
To get to Leeds by ten, I must leave London before six
tomorrow.
You'll have to put the scaffolding up before you go on to
the roof. It's not safe otherwise.
You'll have to have that tooth extracted. It's very badly
infected.
We had to leave the party early. Tom was obviously
unwell.

We've had to cancel our holiday. Tom is just not well


enough for a walking holiday.
must, have to and have got to in the interrogative
Have to and have got to are often preferred in the

interrogative, especially if the obligation is imposed from the


outside.
Compare the following:
What time have you got to be back? ~ Dinner's at
seven. So by half past six really.
How often do you have to travel to America on
business?
~ About once every six months.
Must you leave right now? Won't you stay a little
longer?

Do you have to leave now? ~ I do, unfortunately. I've


got to collect my son from school.
have to and mustn't
We have to use have to for the negative of must when there is
no obligation or necessity to do something:

You don't have to drink champagne at the reception.


You can have a soft drink.
I didn't have to play after all. Jane turned up and could
partner Alice.
You won't have to drive Tom to the airport next
Saturday. Julie's taking him.

We use mustn't to say that something is not allowed

You mustn't drink if you're going to drive afterwards.


You mustn't drink that water. It's contaminated.
You mustn't lie under oath. If you do, that's perjury.

I mustn't forget my keys. I'll put them here so that I


remember them.

Learning English

'Must' as deduction and obligation

Elias Libor from the Czech Republic asks:


I study translating and interpreting. In one of
our language lessons my teacher read a
sentence from the (American) magazine Time:
'The blaze......had to have been very strong'
and said that was incorrect as it should have
been must have been' instead. However, all the

Americans I know told me this construction


sounded perfectly natural to them.

Roger replies:

more questions

It is the case that the grammar of American English at times is


slightly different from the grammar of British English, but where
there are differences, most grammar reference books point out
any alternative versions. For example, they might list examples
of some of the past tense differences as follows:
British English

American English

He woke her with a kiss.

He waked her with a kiss.

They dived into the water.

They dove into the water.

I quitted the job after five


days.

I quit the job after five days.

He burnt all her letters.


The priest wetted the babys
head.
The cellar smelt of rotting
apples.

He burned all her letters.


The priest wet the babys head.
The cellar smelled of rotting
apples.

However, I have checked with all the grammar reference books


that I have to hand and in none of them is had to have been
listed as an alternative to must have been. It may have been
used for emphasis.

Usually, had to indicates the past tense form of must when


must = obligation. Study the following:

'Youll have to get up at five o clock if you want to be in


Birmingham by seven.'
'I must remember to renew my car insurance at the end
of the month.'
'You mustnt park your car on the double yellow lines on
the roads in Britain.'
'She had to pay a fine of 60 when she was caught
speeding on the motorway.'

Note that if we use wont/dont/didnt have to as the


negative of must, then we are expressing the absence of
obligation or necessity and in this respect it is similar in use to
neednt or dont/didnt need to. Compare the following:
'You wont ever have to wear braces around your teeth
again.' ( You neednt ever wear braces around your teeth
again.)
'You dont have to come, if you dont want to.' (You
dont need to come.)
'I didnt have to attend the January meeting, so I went
to see Jane instead.' (I didnt need to attend the January
meeting, so I went to see Jane instead.)

'The following month, I had to present a paper, so my


attendance was essential.

must as deduction
This usage of must is quite different. As in the Time article, we
are registering that we are not absolutely sure about something,
but are guessing or assuming that it has happened, will happen
or is the case. In this sense, must have is the past tense form of
must. Study the following:

'It must be at least five weeks since we last met.'


'You must be Helen. My mother has told me so much
about you.'
'We must have taken the wrong turning. We should be
there by now.'
'They must have missed their train. Otherwise they
would be here by now.'

Note that the negative of must be or must have is cant be or


cant/couldnt have been.
Here, again, we are making an assumption about something.
Study the following:

'She cant be very happy with her husband away on that


oil rig all the time.'
'It cant be lunch time already. That clock must be
wrong.'
'It couldnt have been Charlie who answered the phone
because hes in hospital.'
'I cant find Fifi anywhere. She cant have got out
through the window. The opening is too small.

A question from Claudio from Switzerland:


'What is the difference between 'mustn't' and 'don't have to'?
mustn't / don't have to

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Susan Fearn:
Hi Claudio, well first of all that's a very good question - and confusing 'mustn't'
and 'don't have to' is something that I find learners of English often do, perhaps
because, from the point of view of meaning, the positive and negative forms of
these verbs don't quite match.
'Must' and 'have to' are of course what we call 'modal verbs' and this category of
verbs also includes 'may', 'might', 'should', 'can', 'could' and so on. There are two
things to know about modal verbs:
Firstly, they usually follow a particular grammatical pattern - they're followed by
the infinitive, usually without 'to', so: 'You must go', 'I might see him' and so on.
And secondly, it's not a bad idea to learn them according to their meaning or how
they're used - their function, if you like. For example, they're used to show
possibility or give permission. And this brings me back to 'must' and 'have to'.
Now, one of the ways that 'must' is used in the positive, is when a speaker's telling
you to do something and you really don't have any choice - it's an obligation. And
here's an example:
My daughter wants to go out and I say to her,
"Well, you can go out, but you must be back by 8."
I have the authority, I'm her mother.

I could have said:


"You have to be back by 8" - but that would have been a bit weak. The basic
meaning would be the same - still obligation - but it would sound much less
strong. Now that's because 'have to' shows obligation more generally - it doesn't
necessarily come from a strong, outside authority. So that's the positive forms.
But when we come to the negative forms, the difference in meaning is bigger.
For example, if I say to my daughter:
"You mustn't stay out after 8" that's my authority, my rule. I'm forbidding her
from staying out any later; she has no choice.
So 'must', 'mustn't' - there's a kind of strong authority there.
But if I say:
"You don't have to stay out after 8", it's much weaker - in fact it means
something a little bit different. It implies she doesn't really want to go out and she
doesn't really want to come back after eight and I'm reassuring her that that's okay;
she's got a choice.
So, 'don't have to' means you don't need to, you're not obliged to, it's not necessary
for you to stay out if you really don't feel like it - you have a choice.
Susan Fearn has taught English in Europe, Japan and China and has made
programmes for BBC Learning English in the past. She is currently teaching
English for Journalism and Public Relations at the University of Westminster in
London.
Learn It

Needn't have and didn't need to


Elodie Carpentier from France writes:
I wonder what the difference is between needn't have
done and didn't need to. Which one should I use when?
Roger Woodham replies:
Needn't have and didn't need to
Both these forms are used to talk about past events, but there is
sometimes a difference in use. When we say that someone
needn't have done something, it means that they did it, but it
was not necessary. Didn't need to is also sometimes used in this
way:
You needn't have washed the dishes. I would've put them in the
dishwasher.
You didn't need to wash the dishes. I would've put them in the
dishwasher.
I didn't need to prepare all that food. They phoned to say they
wouldn't be coming.
I needn't have prepared all that food. They phoned to say they
wouldn't be coming.
But we also use didn't need to to say that something was not
necessary under circumstances where it was not done:
The sun came out so we didn't need to take any rainwear on the
trip.
We had plenty of petrol in the tank so I didn't need to fill up.
We didn't need to wait for long for them. They arrived just after
us.

Needn't and don't need to


There is also a difference in use when these verbs are used to
describe present situations. We can use both needn't and don't
need to to give permission to someone not to do something in
the immediate future. We can also use need as a noun here:
You don't need to water the garden this evening. It's going to
rain tonight.
You needn't water the garden this evening. It's going to rain
tonight.
There's no need to water the garden this evening. It's going to
rain tonight.
You don't need to shout. It's a good line. I can hear you
perfectly.
You needn't shout. It's a good line. I can hear you perfectly.
There's no need to shout. It's a good line. I can hear you
perfectly.

However, when we are talking about general necessity, we


normally use don't need to:
You don't need to pay for medical care in National Health
Service hospitals.
You don't need to be rich to get into this golf club. You just
need a handicap.

Need
Note from the above examples that need can either act as a
modal verb or as an ordinary verb. When it acts as a modal
auxiliary verb it is nearly always used in negative sentences, as
the above examples illustrate, although it is sometimes also used
in questions as a modal verb:
Need you leave straightaway? Can't you stay longer?

Need I say more? I would like you to stay.


When it is used as an ordinary verb with to before the following
infinitive and with an s in the third person singular, it appears in
both affirmative and negative sentences and in questions:
She's almost dehydrated. She needs a drink. She needs to drink
something before she has anything to eat. She doesn't need to
stay in bed, but she should have a good rest before she sets off
again. ~ Do I need to stay with her? ~ Yes, I think you should

Learning English

expressing possibility: perhaps/maybe,


may/might

Katinka Raupenstein from Germany


writes:
Hi! I'd like to know when you should use
maybe and when you should use perhaps.
I'm not sure, buy maybe perhaps was used
only in former times. In any case, I've never
heard perhaps on the radio. All the VIPs use
only maybe.

Roger Woodham replies:

maybe / perhaps
In British English both of these adverbs are still very commonly
used and have the same meaning. You use them to say that
something is possible or may be true, but you are not certain.
They can be used interchangeably but of the two, maybe is
very appropriate for more informal contexts and perhaps is

used in more formal situations. Compare the following:

I can't find it anywhere. ~ Perhaps / Maybe you threw


it away.
How old is Jane? ~ I don't really know. In her twenties,
certainly. Twenty-five, maybe.
There were perhaps as many as fifty badly wounded
soldiers in the hospital.
Perhaps I should explain to you how they came to be
there.
St Paul's Cathedral is perhaps one of London's most
prominent landmarks.
Why don't you join us for the New Year celebrations? ~
Yeah, perhaps / maybe I will.
Maybe you are right! Perhaps it would be best if you
didn't invite Johnnie

Note that perhaps is pronounced 'praps'. Note also from the


above illustrations that perhaps and maybe can be used to
refer to past, present or future events.

may / might
Similarly, we can use the modal auxiliaries may or might to say
that there is a chance that something is true or may happen.
May and might are used to talk about present or future events.
They can normally be used interchangeably, although might
may suggest a smaller chance of something happening.
Compare the following:

I may go into town tomorrow for the Christmas sales.


And James might come with me!
What are you doing over the New Year, Ann? ~ Oh, I
may go to Scotland, but there again, I might stay at
home.
If you go to bed early tonight, you may / might feel
better tomorrow.
If you went to bed early tonight, you might feel better
tomorrow.
One of my New Year resolutions is to go to the gym twice
a week! ~ And pigs might fly!

Note that 'Pigs might fly' is a fixed expression and always uses
might. It means that something will never happen.
In the first conditional example, will perhaps could be

substituted.

If you go to bed early tonight, you may / might feel


better tomorrow.

In the second conditional example, where might is an


alternative for would perhaps, may cannot be substituted.

If you went to bed early tonight, you might feel better


tomorrow.

perhaps / maybe / may / might


Finally, as the very last item for 2001, this joke, which gives you
further practice of may and might, maybe and perhaps, has
been voted the top British joke of 2001! Does this tell you
something about British sense of humour? Happy New Year!
Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson* go camping and pitch
their tent under the stars. In the middle of the night, Holmes
wakes his companion up and says: "Watson, look up at the
stars and tell me what you deduce.**" Watson says: "I see
millions of stars and maybe quite a few planets among them. It
may be true that a few of the planets are quite like Earth and
there might be life on them." Holmes replies: "Watson, you
bloody fool***! Somebody has stolen our tent!"
* Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson were the famous
characters created by the British writer of detective stories,
Arthur Conan Doyle in Victorian England.

** Deduce is a rather formal verb and is used particularly in


questions when you want to know what logical conclusions may
be drawn from the available evidence.

*** Bloody is a medium-strong swear word, used to give


emotional emphasis to something that you are saying. It should
not be used in polite situations. For polite conversation,
substitute: You stupid idiot!

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.
more
questions

Learning English

Polite requests

Chu from Malaysia writes:


I don't know how to request something with
Would you mind?
Would you mind lend me some money?
Would you mind lending me some
money?
Which one should I use?
Roger Woodham replies:

There are many different ways of making polite requests in


English.
Would you? / Could you? / Would you like to?
If you are asking other people to do things, you would normally
use Would you or Could you + infinitive. Would you like to?
is also a very polite way of suggesting or requesting something,
politer than Do you want to? Compare the following:

Would you please bring your library books back


today as they are needed by another borrower?

Could you join us on Saturday? Tom's back from


Sydney and we're having a barbecue.
Would you like to join us on Saturday? We're having a
barbecue in the back garden.
Would you care to join us on Saturday? We're
celebrating Tom's return from Sydney.

Do you want to join us on Saturday? We're having a


bash in the garden.

Would you like? + infinitive /


Would you mind?
If you want to sound particularly polite, or if you think the answer
may be negative, you can also use Would you mind + verb-ing as
the preferred alternative to Could you? Would you mind?
literally means: Would you object to?

Would you mind locking the door when you leave? ~


No, not at all!

Could you please lock the door when you leave? ~


Yes, certainly!
If you're not busy at the moment, would you mind
helping me with my homework?

If you're not busy at the moment, could you give me a


hand with my homework?

Can I / could I / may I / might I


If you are requesting something for yourself, all of these forms are
possible. May and might are considered to be more polite, more
formal or more tentative than can and could, but can and could are
usually preferred in normal usage. Compare the following:

Can I ask a favour of you? ~ Of course you can.

Could I ask you to collect Deborah from school


tomorrow ~ Of course you can.
Could I possibly have another cup of coffee? ~ I don't
think you should. You won't sleep tonight if you do.
If you've finished with the computer, may I turn it off?
~ Yes, please do.
Might I leave work a bit earlier today? I've got a
doctor's appointment at 5.

Might is more frequently used in indirect questions, as an indirect


question softens the request. Note the further polite alternatives
that we can use:

I wonder if I might leave work a bit earlier today?


I've got a doctor's appointment.

Would I be able to leave work a bit earlier today? I've


got a dentist appointment at 6.
Would it be OK if I left work a bit earlier today? I've
got to take our cat to the vet.

Would you / Do you mind if I?


Similarly, if we use Do / Would you mind if I? to make a
request, we may be anticipating possible objections:

Would you mind if I put off talking to Henry until


tomorrow? ~ I think that's a mistake. I think you
should speak to him today

Note the difference between: Would you mind? and Would you
mind me/my?:

Would you mind filling the ice trays and putting them
in the freezer? (= you do it)

Would you mind me/my filling the ice trays and


putting them in the freezer? (= I'll do it)

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.
more
questions

Learning English

should and should have, would and would


have, could and could have

Danilo Gomez Barbosa from Columbia


writes:
Could you please explain the difference
between the modal auxiliary verbs should,
could and would and how they are used?
Thanks for your help.
Asim from Pakistan writes:
I still feel some complication in
understanding these modals: would have,
should have and could have. Please give
me some examples to help me understand.

Roger Woodham replies:

should

Should is used to give advice and make recommendations and to


talk about obligation, duty and what is expected to happen.
Reference is to the present and the future. Should is similar to must
but is not as strong as must:

You should always wear a helmet when you go out


cycling on busy roads.

Once the pack is opened, the cooked meat inside should


be consumed within three days.

Should I tell her that her son is playing truant and


skipping school? ~ I think you should. She should
know about it.

should and should have

Should combines with the perfect infinitive to form should have +


past participle when we want to talk about past events that did not
happen, but should have happened. We are talking about an
expectation and referring back to past time. Compare the following:

Before Tom leaves for work, his wife advises him:

You should take your umbrella. It might rain. ~ No, I'll


be all right. I shan't need it.
But it did rain. When he arrives back home, his wife
says:

What did I tell you? You should have taken your


umbrella. Then you wouldn't have got wet.
Reference to the present and future:
You should try and smoke less, Henry. Your health isn't
very good and it's getting worse.
Reference to the past:

I should have given up smoking years ago, Mary. If I


had, I wouldn't be in such bad shape now.

would

If we want to talk about an unreal or unlikely situation that might


arise now or in the future, we use a past tense in the if-clause and
would + infinitive in the main clause. Compare the following and
note that would is often abbreviated to 'd:

How would you manage, if I wasn't here to help you? ~


I'd manage somehow. I wouldn't bother to cook. I'd go
out to eat or bring home a take-away. I'd ask your
mother to help me with the washing and the ironing. I
know she'd help me.

would have
If we want to refer to the past and make a statement about things
that did not happen, we need to use had + past participle in the if
clause and would have constructions in the main clause. Note in
these sentences that we can use 'd as the abbreviation for both had
in the if-clause and would in the main clause:

If he'd taken an umbrella, he wouldn't have got wet on


the way home.

If he'd taken his umbrella, he'd have stayed dry.

could

Could can be used to ask for permission, to make a request and


express ability in the past. Compare the following:

Could I borrow your black dress for the formal dinner


tomorrow? ~ Of course you can!

Could you do me a favour and pick Pete up from the


station? ~ Of course I will!
I could already swim by the time I was three. ~ Could
you really? I couldn't swim until I was eight.

could have
As with would have, and should have, could have is used to talk
about the past and refers to things that people could have done in
the past, but didn't attempt to do or succeed in doing:

I could have gone to university, if I'd passed my exams.

If he'd trained harder, I'm sure he could have


completed the swim.

Note the difference between would have and could have in the
following two examples. Would have indicates certainty that he
would have won if he had tried harder, could have indicates
that it is a possibility. Might have is similar in meaning to could
have, although the possibility is perhaps not quite as great:
If he'd tried a bit harder, he would have won the race.
If he'd tried a bit harder, he could have won the race.

If he'd tried a bit harder, he might have won the race.

should have / could have / wouldn't have


Note the way in which all three of these modals are combined in
these exchanges which refer to a meeting that has just taken place:

Why did you come to the meeting? It didn't need both of


us. You should have known that I would be there. ~
How could I have known you'd be there? I haven't
spoken to you for a fortnight! ~ If I'd known you were
intending to go, I certainly wouldn't have gone!

You will sometimes see would have written as would've,

should have as should've and could have as could've.


If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.
more
questions

Learning English

'Used to' or 'would' in Learn it today

Julie from Belgium writes:


Is this construction correct: Did you used to
play tennis?
Ehtisham Haq, studying English in the
US, writes:
I would like to know the correct use of used
to and would for past habits. Please tell me
which of these is correct:
I used to live in that house.
I would live in that house.

Roger Woodham replies:

used to: questions and negative forms


Used to is used to describe past habits or long-lasting actions and
situations which are now finished

People used to think the sun revolved around the


earth.

I used to take size 12, but now I take size 14

For questions and negative forms, two forms of the verb are used either the normal infinitive pattern after did (more common), or the
past form used (less common):

When you were a kid, did you use to think the sun
revolved around the earth?

When you were a kid, did you used to think the sun
revolved around the earth?
I didn't use to take such a large dress size, but now I
do.
I didn't used to take such a large dress size, but now I
do.

In a more formal style, questions and negatives are possible


without do, following the pattern of a modal auxiliary verb,
although these forms are less often used:

I used not to like contemporary dance, but now I do.

Used you to play the organ in church before you


became a monk?

in 1996/last month etc. - usually/frequently/often etc.


When we use used to, we are describing things that happened at an
earlier stage in our lives which are no longer in place as
circumstances have changed. Note that if we want simply to refer
to what happened in the past, we normally use the simple past
tense, often with an adverbial time phrase:

From 1995 to 1998 I lived in that house and then I


emigrated to Australia.

I returned to Britain two years ago and last year I

bought this house in Bath.


Note that when we want to talk about present habits and states,
we use the present simple tense, often with an adverb of
frequency:

I usually do my homework immediately after supper.

I occasionally smoke cigars, but never cigarettes.

I normally use public transport in London, but I


sometimes drive in despite the congestion charge.

would or used to?


When we are telling a story and recollecting an event from long
ago, we often prefer to use would to describe repeated behaviour in
the past, although both would and used to are possible:

Do you remember what we used to get up to when we


were teenagers? How I would wait for you nearly
every afternoon after school and then we would stroll
home together across the park, holding hands, and you
would feed the ducks on the pond while I had a
cigarette?
Note, Ehtisham, that would in this sense describes past events and
actions. It cannot be used to refer to past states. To describe past
states we can only use used to:

I used to live in that house over there.


(NOT: I would live in that house over there.)

I used to own a 1966 Silver Cloud Rolls Royce.


(NOT I would own a 1966 Silver Cloud Rolls Royce.)
I used sometimes to drive to work in it.

I would sometimes drive to work in it.

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.

Learning English

What if / suppose / supposing

Pattaraporn from Thailand writes:


I would like to know the meaning of what if
and how to use it. Thank you so much for
your answer.

Roger Woodham replies:

We use what if at the beginning of a question when we are


asking about the consequences of an action, particularly one
that is undesirable. We refer in this way to present or future
circumstances:

What if I am made redundant and have no work? What


shall we do then?

What if there are jellyfish? You won't want to swim in


the sea then.

We can also use this structure to refer to past circumstances:

What if the ice had cracked? You would have


disappeared into the icy water and wouldn't be here to
tell us about it.

What if you had slipped? You would've fallen right down


the cliff. There would have been nothing to save you.

As you can see from these examples, what if questions give us


an alternative way of expressing conditional ideas. We could
have said:

What shall we do if I am made redundant and have no


work?

You won't want to swim in the sea, if there are jellyfish


around.
If the ice had cracked, you would've disappeared into
the icy water and wouldn't be here to tell us about it.
If you had slipped, you would have fallen right down the

cliff
However, none of these examples sound as dramatic as "what
if...?". Note that the final two examples in these sequences
refer to imaginary situations that did not occur, for which we
need the so-called 'third' conditional.

Suppose, supposing or what if?


We can also use suppose or supposing as an alternative to
what if when we are asking about the consequences of an
action:

I'm not going to take my umbrella.


~ Suppose it rains?
~ Supposing it rains?
~ What if it rains?
~ What will you do if it rains?

I just caught the last flight of the day with two minutes
to spare!
~ Suppose you had missed the flight?
~ Supposing you had missed the flight?
~ What if you had missed the flight?
~ What would you have done, if you had missed the
flight?

What if / suppose / supposing for suggestions


When referring to present or future circumstances, we also use
these structures to introduce suggestions in a rather tentative
way. We are not so confident that the person we are addressing
will say 'yes', so we do not use the more enthusiastic Let's or
Shall we? in these circumstances:

What if /suppose / supposing we invite Geoffrey to


fill the empty place at dinner? How would you feel about
that?

We haven't got any cream for the sauce. Suppose /


what if / supposing we use milk instead? Would that
be all right?

And I don't have a table cloth for such a large dinner


table. Suppose / supposing / what if we were to use
the green sheet from the double bed? It would look
good with the yellow table napkins.

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.

Learn It

Wouldn't/would & won't/will for refusals and insistence


Pablo Moreno Leon from the Canary Islands writes:
I would like you to explain to me the use of would in
these sentences:
I invited her to my house, but she wouldn't come
That's typical of you - you would go to the pub without
leaving me a note!
Roger Woodham replies:
wouldn't = refused to
There are many uses of would in English, Pablo. In your
example, wouldn't means refused to:
I could see she was crying but she wouldn't tell me what was
wrong.

I invited her to my house but she wouldn't come.


If you use wouldn't in this way, it is softer in tone and sounds
more natural than saying refused to.
would = insisted on
The converse of wouldn't in this sense is when would indicates
that someone insisted on doing something.
You WOULD go and tell her about the barbeque, wouldn't you?
You know I didn't want her to know about it.
She said you were unhelpful? Well, she WOULD say that,
wouldn't she?
We can use would like this when we are being critical of
someone's past actions or behaviour. Note that it has to carry
strong word stress when it is used in this way.
won't / will
In a similar way, will can be used to talk about insistence when
it relates to present situations:
If you WILL eat so much, it's not surprising that you're fat.
If you WILL decline the Invitation to Muriel's wedding, there's
nothing I can do to stop you.
Note that this is one of the few occasions when will is used in
the if-clause in conditional sentences.
Like wouldn't for past situations, won't can be used to talk
about refusal when it relates to present situations:
I can't get these pictures to download. I keep clicking on this
icon, but they won't download.
It's no good trying to persuade him. He won't go and that's that.
Note that shan't can be used in the first person as an alternative
to won't in this sense:
She's invited me many times. But I shan't go.

She's invited me many times, but I won't go to her wedding.


wish... would
We can also use wish with would and other modal verbs to
express refusal combined with regret. Note that although we
use past modal forms, the reference is to the present and future,
here, not to the past:
I wish it would stop raining, but it just carries on. It's been
raining for days.
Don't you wish this holiday might last forever? We've been
having such a marvellous time!
I wish I could give up smoking, but I can't.
I wish those two would shut up. They've been arguing like that
for hours.
Everybody wishes he would stay away from June, but he won't.
Note that to express regret about something which happened in
the past, we can use wish with could have + past participle:
I wish we could have seen the match live, but we just couldn't
get tickets.
I wish my dad could have been here to see me play, but he
couldn't leave my mum.

Learning English

Lots to do with 'do'

M Pedroso from Brazil asks:


M. Pedroso from Brazil asks: Why is the auxiliary
verb do used in affirmative sentences like this: I
do believe in some things?

Roger replies:

more
questions

You are quite right in suggesting that do is used as an auxiliary


verb in questions and negative sentences, like these:
'Do you like sugar in tea and coffee?'
'Did you see Mary last night?'
'What did she tell you?'
'Did you do your homework?'
'I like sugar in coffee but I dont like sugar in tea.'
'I didnt do all my homework.'
'I didnt see Mary.'

' I didnt even phone her so she didnt tell me anything.'

Strong emphasis
You are also quite right in suggesting that do is not normally
used in affirmative sentences. However, it is used when we want
to place strong emphasis on what we are saying to show that we
feel strongly about it in a positive way. In all these cases, do is
pronounced with strong stress. Consider the following:

'I do like sugar in my coffee! Loads of it!'


'He does look smart in his new suit.'
'You may not realise it, but I do love you.'

'I did enjoy Sues cooking last night. What a delicious


meal she served us!

Contrastive emphasis
There are three other circumstances when do is used in
affirmative sentences or clauses.
It is used for contrastive emphasis when we want to contrast
one set of circumstances or point in time with another. Study the
following:

'I wish I could lose some weight.' 'Yes, well you do eat
rather a lot of sweet things.'
'Why didnt you ask him for a loan?' 'I did ask him, but
he said he had no money.'
'I hardly ever see my ex-wife, but I do see my children
every week.

Polite Imperatives
It is sometimes used with imperatives when we want to make a
suggestion or invitation more polite or welcoming. Study the
following:

'Do have some more strawberries! Help yourself!'


'Do come in! Do sit down!'
'Do be careful on holiday! Dont take any risks!'

'Do write and tell us how youre getting on!

Avoiding repetition
It is often used when we want to avoid repeating a verb which
we have already used in the first part of the sentence. Consider
the following:

'Can I have another go with your game boy?' 'Yes, do!'


'She said shed help me with the ironing and she did!'

'Did you see Maria when she was over in London?' 'Yes, I
did!'

Learning English

Verbs in American and British grammar:

Anwar Hassan from Egypt writes:


I am sticking to a British accent, but would
like to know the main differences between
British and American English grammar.
Of course, they are little, but they are of
significant importance.

Roger Woodham replies:

more
questions

Verbs and verb forms in American and British English


grammar:
You are right, Anwar, there are not very many differences in
grammar. Rather more when it comes to vocabulary and
idiom.
Many of the differences in grammar relate to choice of verb or
verb form. Here are some of the most common:

time adverbs with past simple/present perfect


Past-time adverbs, such as just, ever, already and yet are
often used with the past simple in American English, whereas
in British English they would normally be used with the
present perfect. Compare the following:

Did you phone her yet?


Have you phoned her yet?
Did you eat already?
Have you already eaten?
Garry? You missed him. He just left.
Garry? You've missed him. He's just left.
Did you ever go to Canada?

Have you ever been to Canada?


Do you have...? / Have you got...?
In all varieties of English, the 'do' forms of have are used to
express habit or repetition:

Do you always have fruit and cereal for breakfast?


Do you sometimes have a shower in the morning when
you wake up?

In American English, the 'do' forms of have are commonly


used when referring to particular situations. In British
English, we often prefer have with got in these contexts.
Compare the following:

Do you have time to finish this report before you leave?


Have you got time to finish this report before you leave?
Do you have a problem with this?
Have you got a problem with this?

In American English, got and do forms are often mixed. In

British English, they would not be:

We've got a new car! ~ You do?

We've got a new car! ~ You have?


regular and irregular past tenses and past participles
The following verbs are regular in American English, but are
often irregular with -t rather than -ed in British English:
burn
dream
learn
smell
spill
spoil

The kitchen smelled of roast chicken. Dinner was ready.


The kitchen smelt of roast chicken, Dinner was ready.
I have learned that it is better to be safe than sorry.
I have learnt that it is better to be safe than sorry.
He had spoiled his paper by spilling his coffee on it.

He had spoilt his paper by spilling his coffee on it.


The following verbs are regular in British English, but
irregular in American English:
dive
fit
wet

All her clothes fit into the suitcase.


All her clothes fitted into the suitcase.
She wet her long blond hair before pushing it under her
bathing cap.
She wetted her long hair before pushing it under her
bathing cap.
Then she dove into the pool with all her clothes on.

Then she dived into the pool with all her clothes on.
Can / could with verbs of perception
In British English, we normally use can or could with verbs of
perception such as see, hear, taste, feel, smell, when
American English will often use these verbs independently of
can or could. Compare the following:

When I went into the garden, I could smell the cherry


wood burning on the camp fire.

When I went into the garden, I smelled the cherry wood


burning on the camp fire.
I could hear Caroline approaching through the long grass.

I heard Caroline approaching through the long grass.


going to / gonna
In talking about plans and intentions, going to is often
replaced by gonna in informal speech, especially in American
English. Compare the following:

We'll see you at the game. You're gonna play, right?


We'll see you at the game. You're going to play, aren't
you?

And as they say in American English, and now increasingly in


British English:
... have a nice day!

Learning English

Primary auxiliary verbs 'do' and 'have'

Lemine Mohammed asks:


Please clarify when do and have are used as
auxiliary verbs. I would like a comparison
between them both.
Are there some verbs which are conjugated only
with do and others with have or what? And how
to conjugate them in the past?

Roger replies:

more questions

do, does, don't, doesn't


Present simple auxiliary verbs
The auxiliary do is used mainly to form questions and negative
sentences with the present simple tense. It is not normally used

in affirmative sentences.
It is also used in forming tag questions and shortened answers.
Study the following examples:

'I enjoy cycling in the countryside, but I don't enjoy


cycling in towns.'
'She doesn't play the ballgames that girls usually play,
but she plays football.'
'You don't really like Helen, do you?' 'Of course I do! /
No, it's true. I don't.'
'Do all cats drink milk?' 'Most do, some don't.'
'Doesn't he ever take a day off work?' 'He did once in
1999, but he hasn't so far this year!'

Do may be used in affirmative sentences, but when it is used in


this way, it denotes strong contrastive emphasis with heavy
word stress on the auxiliary itself.
Quite a lot of emotion is usually involved. Study the following
examples:

'Do come in! Please don't stand there on the doorstep.'


'He thinks I don't love him, but I do love him with all my
heart!'

'He's not a vegetarian! He does eat meat! I have seen


him eat meat!

did, didn't
Past simple auxiliary verbs
Did and didn't are used as past simple 'helping' verbs in exactly
the same way as do/don't and does/doesn't are used in the
present simple.
Study the following examples:

'I played a lot of rugby as a young man, but I didn't ever


play football.'
'You didn't forget to post my letter, did you?' 'Of course
I didn't.
'Did he pass his exam?' 'He did, yeah!'

'I did remember to put salt into the dishwasher. It's not
my fault that it's not working.'

have/haven't, has/hasn't, had/hadn't


Present perfect and past perfect auxiliary verbs
The auxiliaries have and had are used as 'helping' verbs in the
construction of the perfect and past perfect forms of all main
verbs. They are often pronounced as contracted weak forms in
affirmative sentences and contracted weak forms are also used
in the negative. Study the following examples and say them to
yourself as you read them:

'They've been living in Calcutta for three years now, but


they still haven't got used to the heat.'
'He's collected his medication from the chemist, but he
hasn't actually taken any of the pills yet.'
'Have you seen my green pullover anywhere, Sandra?'
'No, sorry, I haven't.'
'This was a lie, for she'd borrowed his green pullover
and had forgotten to return it.'
'They told me that they'd lived in Wiltshire all their lives,
but had never visited Stonehenge.'
'We have paid for the flights, but we haven't paid the
travel insurance yet.

Notice that in this last example there is strong contrastive


emphasis, so the weak contracted form of have is not used in
the affirmative part of the utterance. This equates to the
emphatic use of do in the earlier examples.

Learn It

do as auxiliary verb
Ali Almalki from Oman writes:
What is the difference in use between I believe and I do
believe
Hamid Hakim from Algeria also asks:
What's the difference if I say I did sleep last night
instead of I slept last night?
Roger Woodham replies:
do / does
As you know, we normally use do or does + infinitive to form
questions and in negative sentences in the simple present (does
for the third person singular, he, she, it and do for all other
persons, I, you, we, they):
Do you like music? - Yes I do.
Does Henry? - Yes, he does.
What kinds of music do you like? - I quite like reggae, but I
don't care for garage very much.
Henry likes garage, but he doesn't get very excited about R & B.
As you can see from the above examples, we also use do and
does in shortened verb forms. The answer to the question: Do
you like music? Is Yes, I do. or No I don't. NOT Yes, I like. or
No, I don't like.
do / does : emphatic use
We do not normally use do or does in affirmative sentences, Ali,
but we can use them for emotive or contrastive emphasis when
we feel strongly about something:

She thinks he doesn't love her, but he does love her. He really
does!
You do look pretty in that new outfit! Quite stunning!
Are you all right? You do look a bit pale. Do please sit down.
I don't see very much of my old friends now, but I do still email
them.
Was that a joke? I do believe you're teasing me!
When we are using the auxiliaries do and does for contrastive or
emotive emphasis like this, we give them extra stress in
pronunciation to make them sound louder, longer or higher in
tone. When you see these words in print used in this way, they
will normally be in italics or bold type or in CAPITAL
LETTERS. Practise saying the sentences above with extra word
stress on do and does.
did
The same rules apply when using did in the simple past tense,
Hamid. It is normally used for making questions, in negative
sentences and with shortened verb forms and can also be used
for contrastive or emphatic use in affirmative sentences:
Did you go and visit your family last weekend? - Yes, I did.
Did you see everybody? - No, I didn't.
I saw my sisters, but my brother was away on business so I
didn't see him.
Remember to give the auxiliary did extra stress in pronunciation
in these examples of contrastive use:
Nearly every one was away on holiday, but I did manage to see
Brenda.
I don't play very much sport now, but I did play a lot of tennis
when I was younger.
I'm so worried at the moment that I don't' sleep well at night, but
I did manage to sleep for six hours, last night.
N

ote that with modal auxiliary verbs, do and did are not used:
Can you play the clarinet? NOT: Do you can play the clarinet?
I can't play the clarinet very well. NOT: I don't can play the
clarinet.
But I can play the recorder. NOT: I do can play the recorder.
forming questions using intonation
Note that we sometimes form questions by using a rising
intonation at the end of the sentence. When we do this, we use
the normal word order of affirmative sentences and don't use
does and do in the simple present and did in the simple past.
We normally use this type of question when the speaker thinks
he knows the answer to a question, but wants to make sure or
when he wants to express surprise of disbelief:
You like hip-hop? But I thought you said you don't like any kind
of rap?
You went to Brighton with Geoffrey? How could you? He's so
boring!
I sold the diamonds. - You sold your mother's diamonds? How
could you?

Learning English

Lots to do with 'do'

M Pedroso from Brazil asks:


M. Pedroso from Brazil asks: Why is the auxiliary
verb do used in affirmative sentences like this: I
do believe in some things?

Roger replies:

more
questions

You are quite right in suggesting that do is used as an auxiliary


verb in questions and negative sentences, like these:
'Do you like sugar in tea and coffee?'
'Did you see Mary last night?'
'What did she tell you?'
'Did you do your homework?'
'I like sugar in coffee but I dont like sugar in tea.'
'I didnt do all my homework.'
'I didnt see Mary.'

' I didnt even phone her so she didnt tell me anything.'

Strong emphasis
You are also quite right in suggesting that do is not normally
used in affirmative sentences. However, it is used when we want
to place strong emphasis on what we are saying to show that we
feel strongly about it in a positive way. In all these cases, do is
pronounced with strong stress. Consider the following:

'I do like sugar in my coffee! Loads of it!'


'He does look smart in his new suit.'
'You may not realise it, but I do love you.'

'I did enjoy Sues cooking last night. What a delicious


meal she served us!

Contrastive emphasis
There are three other circumstances when do is used in
affirmative sentences or clauses.
It is used for contrastive emphasis when we want to contrast
one set of circumstances or point in time with another. Study the
following:

'I wish I could lose some weight.' 'Yes, well you do eat
rather a lot of sweet things.'
'Why didnt you ask him for a loan?' 'I did ask him, but
he said he had no money.'
'I hardly ever see my ex-wife, but I do see my children
every week.

Polite Imperatives
It is sometimes used with imperatives when we want to make a
suggestion or invitation more polite or welcoming. Study the
following:

'Do have some more strawberries! Help yourself!'


'Do come in! Do sit down!'
'Do be careful on holiday! Dont take any risks!'

'Do write and tell us how youre getting on!

Avoiding repetition
It is often used when we want to avoid repeating a verb which
we have already used in the first part of the sentence. Consider
the following:

'Can I have another go with your game boy?' 'Yes, do!'


'She said shed help me with the ironing and she did!'

'Did you see Maria when she was over in London?' 'Yes, I
did!'

Learning English

be able + infinitive

Diego Alenjandro from Colombia asks:


Is it OK to say: 'I haven't could do it'? What I
mean is that I've been trying to do something,
but actually I've not done it because I cannot.
So, how can I say this?
Thanks for your attention, Roger. I hope I'm
making myself clear enough.

Roger replies:

more
questions

Perfectly clear, Diego. The answer is that we can't combine this


tense and this modal in this way. We must say either:
'I couldn't do it' or 'I haven't been able to do it'.
The difference in usage is that if we say: 'I couldn't do it', we
are thinking about a particular action or actions that were
completed in the past, e.g.

'I couldn't repair the car by myself, so I asked a


mechanic to help me.'
OR: 'I wasn't able to repair the car by myself, so I
asked a mechanic to help me.'
OR: 'I was unable to repair the car by myself, so I
asked a mechanic to help me.'

However, if we say: 'I haven't been able to do it', we are


thinking of a period of time for the activity which extends right
up to the present, e.g:
'I've worked on it every day this week, but I still haven't
been able to complete the report.'
'They've been unable to visit him since he was admitted
to hospital.'
'Have you been able to find out anything about her?'
This is the sort of context that you are referring to, Diego, in the
example you quote. Can has no perfect form, so we have to use
has/have been able to.
Note that we can form the negative with not able or unable.

Similarly, can has no future form either, so we must also use be


able to + infinitive when we want to refer to the future. Study
the following examples:
'I have a very poor sense of balance, so I don't think I
shall ever be able to ride a horse.'
'He is badly injured, that's true, but I'm sure he'll be
able to walk again by the summer.'

'If the snow continues to fall, we'll be unable to leave


the house.'

Note also that we cannot combine can with another modal verb,
so if we want to use may, might or should and combine
possibility or probability with ability, we have to use be able
to and not can or could. Study the following:
'The doctor might be able to see you this afternoon.'
'This store is closing, but we may be able to offer the
sales staff a job in another branch.'
'I should be able to fix the upstairs toilet with the tools
in your toolbox.'
In the first two examples above, there is not much difference in
terms of possibility between may and might. They could be
used interchangeably without affecting the meaning. In the final
example above, it is likely or probable that the toilet will be
fixed.

Finally, we normally use can or could in preference to be able


to:
in the sense of know how to
with verbs of the senses such as hear, see, smell, feel,
taste

Study

with verbs of thinking, e.g. decide, remember,


understand, believe.

the following:
'Can you speak Japanese?'
'Can you see what it says on the departures board?'
'I can't see a thing without my glasses.'
'I couldn't taste the garlic in the mayonnaise, although
my wife could.'
'I can't remember when I last saw Joan.'
'I can't believe you're going to marry him.'
'They couldn't decide whether to buy a red or a blue
car.'

Learning English

being

S Boon and D Nukoon from Thailand


write:
Could you please explain the usage of the
adjective unfair to us?
For example: I won't argue with you, but I
think you are being unfair. Also, we'd like to
learn why being is placed in front of unfair.
How is you're being unfair different from
you're unfair?
Santhosh KP from India writes:
Really, this site has helped me a lot. The
doubts which people are asking about are
really the doubts of a majority. I am doubtful
about using being. So can you please explain
to me the different uses of being with
different examples?
Bhavin from India writes:
Can you please explain how being is used
with the past participle?

Roger Woodham replies:

being + adjective
We normally use the progressive form with an adjective when
we are talking about actions and behaviour. And being unfair
in your example sentence, Boon and Nukoon, relates to
somebody's behaviour of not being fair in their actions, so the
progressive form is preferred. Here are some further examples:

You're being silly / foolish / childish when you do


such silly / foolish / childish things.

I was walking on tiptoe and being very careful not to


wake the baby.

However, when the adjectives relate to feelings, we do not use


the progressive form:

I was upset / worried when I heard that they would

have to operate on John's knee.

I am delighted / overjoyed to hear that you have


passed all your exams.

being + past participle

We use being with the past participle, Bhavin, in present


progressive and past progressive passive forms. So we might say:

My car is being serviced. Instead of: The local garage


is servicing my car.

The computers are being installed tomorrow.


Instead of: They're installing the computers tomorrow.
My nieces enjoyed being taken to the circus.
Rather than: I enjoyed taking my nieces to the circus.
I was quite sure I was being followed.
Instead of: I was quite sure someone was following me.
She was being punished for being cruel to the cat.
Rather than: They were punishing her for being cruel
to the cat.

Note that cruel in the above example is an adjective describing


behaviour so the progressive form is used with it.
Note that other passives with being, i.e the future progressive
passive (will be being) and perfect progressive passive (has
been being) are quite rare.
being in participle clauses

We can use an adverbial participle clause to express reason or


cause as an alternative to a because/since/as clause. Using a

participle clause in this way is more characteristic of written


English or a literary style, rather than spoken colloquial English.
Compare the following:

Being French, he is passionate about wine and cheese.


Instead of : Because he is French, he is passionate
about wine and cheese.

Being a friend of Tony Blair, I'm often invited to No 10.

Rather than: As I am a friend of Tony Blair, I'm often


invited to No 10.
Being quite slim, I was able to squeeze through the
hole in the railings. Instead of: Since I am quite slim I
was able to squeeze through the hole in the railings.

Being rather over weight, Geoffrey was unable to


squeeze through. Rather than: Because he's rather
over weight, Geoffrey was unable to squeeze through.

verb + verb-ing / adj + prep + verb-ing


Note that being as verb-ing, is required in all such instances:

Would you mind being quiet for a moment?

I look forward to being interviewed on the current


affairs programme.
She was afraid of being accused of a crime which she
did not commit.

I am tired of being taken for granted and expected to


do all the housework.

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.

Learning English

concern, concerned, concerning

Eunice Cheung from Hong Kong writes:


I would like to ask about the differences in
meaning and use between concern and its
related forms concerned and concerning.
Thanks a lot.

Roger Woodham replies:

You are quite correct, Eunice, to suggest that concern and its
related forms are used in a variety of different ways. Here are
some of the most important.

concerned (adj) = worried


Note the different ways in which the adjectival form is used:

Why do you keep ringing me? ~ Well, I'm concerned


about you. Are you all right?

I was very concerned that my daughter might not


have proper clothing for the skiing trip.
I was concerned for her safety as well. There have
been a lot of avalanches recently.

There was a concerned expression on his face. I knew


something awful had happened.

it concerns me = it worries me

Note that when concern is employed as a verb in this way, it cannot


be used in the first or second person and it is normally used with the
preparatory subject it. Note also that concern is not normally used
with progressive forms. We need to indicate the idea of progression
in some other way. Compare the following:

It concerns me that she'll be in London for a whole


week on her own.
Rather than:
That she'll be in London for a whole week on her own
concerns me).

Doesn't it concern you? She's only nineteen.

The pollution problem in that part of the river is


beginning to concern all the local anglers.

concern (noun) = worry

When concern is used as a noun, it expresses worry about a


situation:

There is growing concern that the climbers may have


lost their lives.

He expressed deep concern about the way in which the


elections had been held.

concern (verb) / concerning (prep) = aboutWhen you use


concern or concerning in this way, you are indicating what a
question or a topic is about. Concerning and relating to are the
formal equivalents of the much more informal about.
Compare the following:
Why are you arguing? What's it all about? What does it concern?

~ It's about the long lunch breaks enjoyed by the senior


executives.

~ It concerns the long lunch breaks enjoyed by the


senior executives.
For information concerning / relating to opening hours
during the summer months, contact the club secretary.
If you want to know about opening hours in the
summer months, give Joan a ring.
A number of questions had been tabled relating to /
concerning the dangers of the new vaccine.

We had a lot of questions about people's concerns


about the new vaccine.

concerned as past participle = involved / affected

The participle modifies the noun or pronoun in these examples and


can be used instead of a participle clause:

There was a brawl outside the nightclub. Those


concerned were held in custody overnight. / The
youths (who were) involved were held in custody
overnight.

Many have lost their savings. The pensioners


concerned will receive substantial compensation / The
pensioners who are affected by this will receive
compensation.

as far as I'm concerned = in my opinion


When you want to express an opinion, you can use this formula as
an alternative to in my view or in my opinion:

As far as I'm concerned / In my view / In my


opinion, the English football supporters should not be
held responsible for starting the fight.

as far as x is concerned = concerning x


You can use these expressions to introduce the topic that you wish
to talk about or the issue you want to refer back to - i.e. it may have
been raised once already and you, as the current speaker, want to
return to that topic. As far as x is concerned is a bit less formal
than concerning x:

As far as foreign languages are concerned, I think


they should be taught in primary schools.

Concerning foreign languages, in my view it is


appropriate to teach them at primary school level.

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message Board in the You,
Me and Us part of our website.

Learning English

could, was able to and managed to

Esra Demir Shaalan from Turkey writes:


First of all, I have to tell you that I have been
very happy since I saw this wonderful and
incredibly helpful page.
My question is: When should I use could,
was able to and managed to? Please help
me.

Roger Woodham replies:

could

Could can be used in many different ways, to ask for permission,


to make a request or to express ability when referring to the past.
Was able to is sometimes used as an alternative to could when we
are discussing ability or possibility. We tend to use could when
we are talking about ability generally. Compare the following:

By the time she was seven, she could already speak


three languages.

She started the viola at the age of eight and after only
six months she could play it quite well.

Her brother Jack was an excellent swimmer. He could


beat anybody in his class.

was able to / managed to

We tend to use was able to or managed to if we are talking about


what happened in a particular situation or are referring to a
specific achievement:

Were you able to / Did you manage to speak to him


before he left home?
~ No, I'm sorry, I wasn't able to / didn't manage to
reach him.

The fog came down and I wasn't able to / didn't


manage to get to the top of the mountain.
My brother wanted to carry on, but we managed to /

were able to talk him out of it.


However, with verbs that refer to the five senses, see, hear, smell,
feel, taste, and with verbs that refer to thought processes,
understand, believe, remember, decide, we normally use could,
even when we are talking about specific occasions:

He was standing very close to me and I could smell the


garlic on his breath.

He asked me when Julie's birthday was, but I couldn't


remember.
I couldn't decide whether to ask him for a lift or not.

I could see that he'd been running.

unable to / not succeed in

Note that unable to is an alternative negative form of not able to


and succeed in is a slightly more formal alternative to manage to.
But remember that succeed in is followed by verb + ing, rather than
verb + infinitive:

We were unable to leave the room until the locksmith


arrived and succeeded in unlocking the door.

I was unable to complete the report as several pieces of


information were missing.
Having obtained them, I succeeded in completing it
after a further two days.

be able to
Note that can has no infinitive form, no -ing form, no perfect
form and no future form. It cannot follow another modal auxiliary
verb. On all of these occasions, we have to use be able to instead.
Compare the following:

I'd like to be able to swim like Jack. He swims like a


fish.

When I'm at the sea-side, I enjoy being able to take a


swim every morning.
Unfortunately, Jack hasn't been able to swim since his
accident.

Lets' hope he'll be able to resume his daily swimming


training soon.

I'm not a member, but can I swim in this pool? ~ Why


don't you speak to the secretary? She may / might /
should be able to help you.

manage = succeed / cope


We use the verbs manage to and manage a great deal in current
English when we want to say that we are able to cope with a
difficult situation or find time for a particular task. Compare the
following:

It was very icy, but I managed to keep the car on the


road.

Veronica was very upset when Ben left her, but she
managed to smile nevertheless.
She didn't really want to go to Mexico, but Tony
managed to persuade her somehow.
Can you help me put up my new shed? ~ I can manage
a few hours in the morning, but I'm busy in the
afternoon.
This is an ideal job for those who can only manage a
few hours each week.

Can I give you a hand with that? ~ No, it's all right. I'll
manage./ I can manage.

If you would like more practice more please visit our Message
Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.

A question from Nyu Shvei in Hong Kong.


Nyu wants to know when to use the two sentences, I didnt go home, I
wouldnt go home?

Listen to the audio


Download the audio (4mb)
Martin Parrott answers:
Oh this is a very interesting example. I think I didnt go home is quite easy.
Thats not the problem. I didnt go home is a simple statement of fact. Its
completely neutral; its just giving the information. The minute we come across a
word like wouldnt a modal verb, theres more involved and the interesting
thing about I wouldnt go home is that it could have two completely different
meanings. Of course we need to learn these and use these in context. And without
a context we cant know which one it is.
There are two meanings as I said. The first is, I wouldnt go home, would mean
I refused to go home. People wanted me to go home, people tried to persuade me
to go home but I insisted on staying, on not going home, I refused to go home.
Thats the first meaning.
The second meaning is related to the use of the word would to express a habit in
the past, something which is done repeatedly. And there I wouldnt go home
means that on a large number of occasions I didnt go home. So perhaps I might be
talking about my childhood and I might be talking about the fact that my parents
worked and the house was empty at the end of the day so that when I finished
school I wouldnt go home Id go to my grandmothers or to some friends
houses and I wouldnt go home. This is a regular habit.
Question:
Is there anything similar to that in the present?
Martin:
Now that is an interesting question. Because of course grammatically we can see
would as the past of will or wouldnt as the past of wont and we do talk
about somebody who refuses to do something using wont in the present not in
the future in the present. She wont go home means she is standing there saying
Im not going home, Im staying here. So yes, its very similar.
And we also, although interestingly this is often not taught, we use will and
wont in the present, not in the future, in the present, to express things that
happen repeatedly.

So you know, I might say, when I get up Ill go, I will go into the bathroom and
gargle and swallow some water and clean my throat and make a noise with it every
morning. And there the meaning of will is a present meaning and not a future
meaning. I might say, When I get up, I wont have breakfast, Im in too much of a
hurry I go straight to work, and there that wont like the wouldnt in
wouldnt go home is expressing something that I dont do on a very regular basis
in the present.
Question:
So thats quite an easy way for learners to remember it its something that
happens on a regular basis its something quite normal in their lives.
Martin:
And the interesting thing is that when they come across these the wouldnts
and the wonts like all modal verbs they need to look at the context because one
of the things about modal verbs is that they can have lots of different meanings
and we need to spot the meaning by looking at the context in which its being
used.
Learning English

Double negatives and the present perfect


continuous: recent or ongoing activity?

Jana Volencova from The Czech Republic


asks:
1. Is it correct to use two nots in a sentence
like: Dont dare not to do it?
2. Does the present perfect continuous tense
have two meanings? What makes me think that
is the comparison of two sentences like: It has
been snowing and I have been learning English
for five years.'
Roger replies:

double negatives

more
questions

Whilst not very common, double negatives are fine in standard


English, provided they both carry a full meaning, as in your
example. Further examples might be:

'Never do nothing!' (I.e. Always do something!)


'Never say 'no', if he asks you to help him.' (I.e.
Sometimes say 'yes'.)

'Don't think about not coming to the station to see me


off. I shall be so disappointed if you're not there.'

In non-standard English, in certain dialects, two, or even three,


negatives may be used to express a single negative meaning. It
is important to recognise these dialectal forms, though it might
sound strange if you used them actively yourself. Here are a few
examples:
'He didn't do nothing!' (= He didn't do anything OR He
did nothing.)
'Since I got home last night, I ain't spoke to nobody
nowhere.' (= Since I arrived home last night, I haven't
spoken to anybody anywhere.)

'We ain't got no beer left. Shall I get some?' (= We


haven't got any beer left. Shall I fetch some?)

Present perfect continuous


There are different aspects of past continuous usage. In the
example you quote, 'It has been snowing', where there is no
adverbial phrase, the results or effects of the activity are still
evident. It may have stopped snowing for the time being, but
the snow is almost certainly still on the ground for all to see.
Look at the following examples of this usage. The final three
examples are taken from the Goldilocks and the Three Bears
children's story when the bears return home to find that their
house has been disturbed:

'Gosh! You're out of breath. Have you been running?'


'You've been eating garlic, too. I can smell it on your
breath.'
'Somebody's been eating my porridge.' (There's very little
left.)
'Somebody's been sitting in my chair.' (The chair has
been damaged.)
'Someone's been sleeping in my bed. And she's still
there!'

Use of the present perfect continuous in the Goldilocks story


increases the suspense and makes us think that at any moment
we shall discover where Goldilocks is.

When we use the present perfect continuous with a for/since


adverbial phrase, we are talking about actions which started in
the past and are still ongoing, as in your example, Jana. Further
examples would be:
'You've been reading that book since Christmas and you
still haven't finished it yet!'
'How long have you been waiting?' 'I've been standing
here for half an hour. These buses never come.'
'John's been looking for a job for over a year now, but he
still hasn't found one.'

'I've been working on this since six o' clock and now it's
nearly midnight. I'm tired!

Note that when we use an adverbial phrase with for, we are


talking about a period of time up to the present. When we use
an adverbial phrase with since, we mention the starting time of
the activity. Try not to confuse the two usages. If we wanted to
re-write the final example above using a for-phrase, we would
have to say:
'I've been working on this for nearly six hours.'

'Finished' in questions

Have you finished?


A question from Taher Abudllah in Yemen:
In a conversation, I heard someone say 'Are you finished at the flat?' Is this expression
correct? If yes, why? Because I know that the right expression is Have you finished...?
Hello there. Youve certainly posted a tricky question!
Lets first say that both expressions are correct. Its perfectly alright to say Are you

finished at the flat?' instead of Have you finished at the flat? Are you finished? uses
the past participle finished as though it were an adjective. So in a similar vein, we can
say:
Have you finished at work? or Are you finished at work?
Both questions are grammatically correct and acceptable in any situation. Some native
speakers would tell you that they see no difference between the two question forms. But
others might say that they perceive a slight nuance of difference between them. It really
depends on the tone of voice the question is delivered in and the attitude of the listener.
Lets discuss this in more detail then. Some people consider Have you finished? to be
more polite than 'Are you finished? In the examples Im about to give you, either
question form could be used but perhaps if you replace the question with Are you
finished?' in the following situations, a bit of impatience is implied. See what you think:
Mum to kid eating - Have you finished?
Teacher to student - Have you finished?
Some people would argue that using the present perfect tense and forming the question
Have you finished? seems to politely give the possibility of more time to finish, whereas
'Are you finished? lets the person know they are nearly out of time and no more is
available.
Well, personally, I think tone of voice is the all important aspect here. You can express
impatience or politeness just from the manner in which you say either of these questions:
Have you finished? Are you finished? (that was my impatient voice)
Have you finished? Are you finished? (that was my polite voice)
Well I hope you could hear the differences there and that you are successful sounding
polite or impatient depending on the situation that youre in!

About Trudi Faulkner-Petrova

Trudi Faulkner-Petrova has a BA (Hons) in English, Bsc. in Psychology and


Cert.TESOL. She has been teaching EFL, EAP and Business English in international
schools, businesses and universities in Beijing over the last 10 years. Currently, she is a
freelance tutor for ESOL, English Literature, SAT/TOEFL preparation and also works for

the British Council as an IELTS and BULATS examiner. She is in the final year of studies
for an Msc. in Psychology.
Learning English

get + past participle

Two questions this week on the use of


get plus past participle:
Gholam ali Sobat from Iran writes:
Would you please advise me by explaining the
differences between married and got married
and their use?
Kyoko from Japan writes:
I always check the question and answer web
page. It helps me to improve my poor English.
I have got a lot of questions.
One of them is get in the following sentence:
Can you get your work finished by noon?
Can you finish your work by noon?
Is there very much difference between the two?
Roger Woodham replies:

get + past participle


There is not very much difference between use of the
active verb and get with the past participle in
these examples. When we use the get construction,
it sometimes makes what we are saying more
immediate. Compare the following:
He married a girl from Texas.
(Here the question is who not when, and got
married to would be more clumsy.)
We got married on New Year's Day. (Here we are
focusing on the day itself.)

Can you get this done by Friday? ~ Hm. This sounds


quite urgent. No problem.
Can you do this by Friday? ~ Hm. This doesn't sound
too urgent. That should be OK.
We frequently use get with..
engaged/married/divorced/lost/dressed/changed/wash
ed:
When are you going to get dressed? You'll be late for school.
I'm just going to get changed. Will you wait for me?
Don't get lost on the mountains. Make sure you've got a
detailed map and a compass.
They went out together for about three months and then they
got engaged.
Note that although we could substitute dress or change for
get dressed and get changed in the above examples, we
would have to say lose yourselves as an alternative to get
lost.
There is no alternative for get engaged.
get + past participle = be + past participle
To make passive structures in informal spoken
English, we sometime use get instead of be with the
past participle:
Our cat got run over last Friday when it was trying
to cross the road. (= was run over)
I know you'll get hurt if you carry on with this
relationship.
(= be hurt)
I got caught doing 120 mph on the M1 and now I've
got to go to court. (= was caught)
I don't get paid very much for delivering
newspapers.

(= am not paid)

get + object + past participle


In informal spoken English, when we are talking
about having things done for us by others, we
sometimes prefer to say get something done
instead of have something done:
When are you going to get your car insured? ~ As
soon as I can afford it!
David is getting his head shaved, just like all the
other footballers.
Why don't you get your winter coat dry-cleaned?
It will look like new.
Remember to get your passport renewed in time don't leave it until just before you go!

Learning English

happen

Ruben from Italy asks:


I have this question about the use of the verb
happen. Which of the following are correct:
1. What happens when the contract will be
expired?
2. What will happen when the contract expires?
3. What happens when the contract expires?

4. What does it happen when the contract


expires?
Also, can I use happen like this?
5. I dont happen to be a teacher.

Roger replies:

more
questions

In your first four listed examples above, Ruben, you are


referring to future time, but only 2 and 3 are grammatically
correct.
Lets look at the arrangement of structures in your second
sentence.

When behaves like if in subordinate clauses of this kind and


remains in the present tense when we are referring to a future
condition. Consider the following:
'What will happen when the contract expires?'
'What will happen if I get home late?'

'What will you do if I dont return till Thursday?'

Lets look now at the arrangement of structures from your third


sentence. If we are discussing a general truth, rather than a
specific instance or event, the main clause usually remains in the
present tense as well as the tense in the if or when clause.
Consider the following:
'If the roads are icy, I stay at home.'
'What sort of clothes do you wear when the temperature
falls below -15 C?'
'What happens in this company when male staff request
paternity leave?'
However, in your example, Ruben, we can use the present tense
in both clauses to refer to a future event. It is clear that you are
talking about your specific contract because you refer to it as
the contract. (If you had said: What happens when contracts
expire? you would be discussing general truths.)

For your fourth sentence, remember:


no does/do/did when what/who question refers to the
subject.
When 'wh-' questions, like what, who or which, refer to the
subject of the sentence, we do not use the auxiliary forms
do/does/did. These auxiliaries are used only when the whquestion refers to the object. Compare the following:

'Which animals rear their young in nests?' 'Squirrels rear


their young in nests called dreys.'
'Which animals did you see on safari?' 'We saw lions,
leopards and tigers.'
'Who saw the accident?' 'I saw it.'
'What did you see?' 'I saw the car collide with a bus.'

The exception to this rule is if you wish to use do/does/did for


emphasis when what/who/etc questions refer to the subject.
Thus, normally, we expect to hear:
'Who earns more than a hundred grand a year in this
company?' 'The Chairman earns 150,000.'
'What happens when the contract expires?' 'Under normal
circumstances, its renewed.'
But if the answer is not known and we wish to emphasise the
question in a particular way, use of the auxiliary would be
appropriate. Thus:
'Well, what does happen when your contract expires?
Does anyone know?'

'Well, who does earn more than a hundred grand in this


company? Does anyone?'

Four fifth sentence happen can be used with a following


infinitive to suggest that something may happen by chance.
Consider the following:
'If you happen to see my father, ask him to ring me at
home later this evening.'
'If you happen to need any help with the decorating,
dont hesitate to ask me.'
'In your example, the context for your statement might be the
following:
'I dont happen to be a teacher, though I sometimes give
lessons to help out.

Learning English

have + infinitive/-ing

Aida from Spain asks::


I would like you to clear up for me usage of
two structures involving the verb have when
it is followed by a bare infinitive as in

I won't have you stay out late


I've never had my car break down
on the motorway

and when it is followed by -ing form as in

I won't have you smoking in my


classroom.

Roger Woodham replies:

more
questions

have + object + infinitive / -ing form


This special usage of the verb have means 'to cause to happen'
or 'to experience'. There is often little or no difference in
meaning between the two forms, e.g.:

He had us wash the dishes after supper.


He had us washing the dishes after supper.

When we choose the infinitive, we are pointing to things that


happen, or (have) happened or might happen. In your own
example,
'I've never had my car break down on the motorway'
you are saying that it has never happened, so you chose the
bare infinitive.
When we choose the -ing form, we are thinking of things that
are happening, were happening or might be happening.
Depending on how we are thinking about it causes us to choose
one or the other. Compare the following. In the first three
examples you can visualise things that are happening or were

happening, so the continuous form works best:

Now that the epidemic is over, it's lovely to have rabbits


running around in the fields once again.
I opened the bonnet of the car and saw that I had water
dripping out of the radiator.
The way he told the story was so funny. He had us
literally crying with laughter.
You really ought to have the chemist take a look at that
wasp sting. It looks really nasty.
He had us prune back all the shrubs so that they didn't
overhang his neighbour's garden.
I'm ready to see him now, Geraldine. Have him come in,
please.

I won't have...
When we use the expression I won't have..., it means I won't allow... and here the -ing form
best, but be careful: after allow, you need to + infinitive:

I won't have you smoking in the bedroom. = I won't allow you to smoke in the bedroom
I won't have you staying out late. = I won't allow you to stay out late.

She wouldn't have him telling her when she could go out and who she could go out wi

have + object + past participle

This structure is also used when we talk about causing things to be done or about things happe
you, but with the past participle, note that it always has a passive meaning and can sometimes
instead of the passive:

I'm going to have my car repaired next week. (It's going to be repaired next week.)
Two of Henry VIII's wives had their heads cut off (Two of his wives were beheaded)
Have you ever had your credit cards stolen? (Have they ever been stolen?)
We had to have our nineteen-year-old spaniel put down. (He had to be put down.)
Kevin had his air pistol confiscated by the headmaster. (It was confiscated last week.)

I think you should have the curtains dry-cleaned. Don't try to wash them yourself.

Learn It

Have and have got


Magrit from Germany from Subrata from Brazil writes:
'Is this correct: How many subsidiaries does your
company have got?' (Magrit)
'I cannot understand the use of have had and had had.'
(Subrata)
Roger Woodham replies:

'have' / 'have got'


When we are talking about possession, relationships, illnesses
and characteristics of people or things we can use either have
or have got. The have got forms are more common in an
informal style.
Have got has the same meaning as have and both are used as
present tenses. Note that have got is NOT the present perfect of
get.
To make questions and negative sentences with have we
normally use the auxiliary verb do. To make questions and
negative sentences with have got we use the auxiliary verb
have. So your question, Magrit, with have got must be formed
as follows:
How many subsidiaries has your company got?
Study these further examples and note that in informal speech
we often switch from one form to the other:
- How many subsidiaries does your company have?
- It has two.
- How many sisters do you have?
- Ive got three (sisters).
- Do you all have your own bedrooms?
- Sues got her own bedroom, but neither Debbie nor I have. We

have to share.
(Note in this last example that have to is used as an alternative to
must because the need to share is imposed on the sisters.)
- Have you got a new car, Paul?
- Yes I have. I bought it last week.
- Has it got air conditioning?
- No it hasnt. But its got a CD player.
- Do you have very many CDs?
- Ive got hundreds.
Note the way in which we form short answers and question tags
with have got and have:
- Have you got a sore throat as well as a runny nose?
- No, I havent.
- But youve got a high temperature, havent you?
- Yes, I have.
- Does this music school have enough pianos?
- No, it doesnt.
- But you have enough opportunities to practise, dont you?
- No, we dont.
future forms of 'have'
Note that we normally use the have got form of have only in the
present tense. For future reference different forms of have used.
Compare the following:
- Have you got tickets for the match on Saturday?
- No, I havent. Not yet.
- Will you have them by tomorrow?
- I hope so.
- Have you got any time to help me with my maths homework?
- Not now I havent. Sorry.
- Are you going to have any time at the weekend, do you think?
- Yes, Ill probably have some time then.
past tenses with 'have'
Similarly, for past tenses we use different forms of have, not
have got. Compare the following:

- Have you still got a bad headache?


- Yes, I have.
- How long have you had it?
- Ive had it on and off since yesterday.
- Did you have it at the concert last night?
- Yes, I did. I couldnt concentrate on the music properly.
'have had' / 'had had'
Have had is the present perfect form of have, Subrata,
describing actions or states which started in the past and
continue up to the present. Had had is the past perfect form
of have, which we use to talk about longer actions or situations
which continued up to a past moment that we are describing.
Compare the following:
- Ive had stomach ache ever since I ate those spam sandwiches.
- Ive got some pills which are good for digestion. Why dont
you take those?
I started out on the five-mile swim after Id had a good rest. If I
hadnt had a good rest, I would never have completed it. But
because I had had a good rest before I started, I completed it in
less than two hours.
Note from the above examples that Ive is the contracted form
of I have and Id is the contracted form of I had. It is also the
contracted form of I would:
If I hadnt had a good rest beforehand, Id never have completed
the five-mile swim.

A question from Batchazi:


Thank you in advance for letting me know which is the right form between I
haven't and I don't have. I sometimes hear the second form, but I don't know
why they don't say I haven't. Thank you very much.

Ask about English


Listen to the answer

Karen Adams answers:


Have is a very interesting verb because it has many purposes. Sometimes it's an
auxiliary verb, for example in the present perfect I've seen that film have
here doesn't really have a meaning, it just helps support the main verb see. Other
auxiliary verbs are verbs such as do so Do you have a pen? where do is the
auxiliary verb. But in the example do you have a pen?, have actually is a
main verb, it has some meaning. It means own or possess. So sometimes have is
an auxiliary verb and sometimes it's a main verb.
In the question we're asked about the difference between I haven't and I don't
have. When we use I don't have, for example I don't have a pen we're using
have as a main verb meaning to own or possess: I don't have a car Do you
have a pencil? We need the auxiliary verb do to help support the main verb
have. Occasionally you'll hear someone say I haven't a clue, but using
haven't in this way isn't really usual. So for example we wouldn't normally say I
haven't a pen or I haven't a book. We would normally say I don't have a
book, or I don't have pen.
In British English, of course, you might also hear I've got: I've got a book, I've
got a pen, I've got a new car. Here have is playing the part of the auxiliary
verb and this is where we can use haven't: I haven't got a book, I haven't got a
pen, Have you got a new car?
It's important to remember then that have can be a main verb or an auxiliary
verb. If it's a main verb you need another auxiliary to support it, such as do. Do
you have a new car?
When it's an auxiliary verb it's helping another verb Have you got a new car?
But please try to avoid I haven't a new car.
Learning English

Have to do and to have done

Laxman Kumar Regmi from Nepal


writes:
Please explain to me how and when we have
to use have + to + verb (have to learn,
having to finish, etc) and to + have + past
participle (to have finished, to have sent, to
have gone, etc).

Roger Woodham replies:

To have done something


This is the infinitive form of the present perfect tense.
Remember, we use the present perfect to describe something which
has been (recently) completed and still has a bearing on present
and/or future circumstances. Compare the following:

I have recently returned from India. To have seen the Taj


Mahal in the early morning sunlight will always be
something I shall never forget.

You went to Aberdeen last week, didn't you? ~ Yes, I did. ~


To have gone all the way to Aberdeen and yet not to have
called on your mother-in-law is something I cannot
understand.
So, do you have any money left at all now? ~ No, I don't. ~
To have lost all your money betting on horses is
irresponsible to say the least when you have a family to
look after.

Using an infinitive clause as the subject of the sentence in this way


is a little unusual in an informal style. It is the sort of statement you
would make having reflected on something of importance or
significance.

To have something done


Take care not to confuse to have done something with to have
something done. This structure (have + object + past participle)
is used to talk about arranging for other people to do things for us
and has the same sort of meaning as a passive sentence. Compare
the following:

We had this piece of furniture made specially so that it fits


into the corner. It was made by John Lawrence, the antique
furniture restorer.

Why did you take your car to the garage? ~ To have it


serviced. ~ When my car needs to be serviced, I just hand it
over to Michael.
Note that in informal English, we sometimes talk about
getting things done, rather than having them done:

I must get my watch repaired. It's so inconvenient being


without one.
When are you going to get your hair cut? ~ I'm not going
to get it cut. I'm going to let it grow.

Have to / had to / having to


Like must, have to expresses obligation. Sometimes it doesn't
matter which one we use, but the main difference is that must
expresses personal feelings and have to expresses obligation
which is imposed. Compare the following:

Is it really as late as that? I must go now / I have to go


now.

I really must phone my mum tonight. I haven't spoken to


her for ages.
I know you don't want to, but you'll have to speak to him.
He's waiting for your call.
I'm sorry I'm late. I had to finish some work before I could
leave. (Notice there is no past or participial form of must.)
Having to finish your homework before you're allowed to
watch television is not fair.

have got to
Note that we sometimes use have got to in present tense form as

an alternative to have to. Although have got to often expresses


future obligation, there is no future form of this verb. It is not used
to express past obligation either. For future and past tense forms,
we have to use have to. Compare the following:

Can't you come to Brighton with me on Saturday? ~ No,


I've got to work on Saturday. ~ You had to work last
Saturday too. Will you have to work the following Saturday
as well?

A question from Yukiazb in Japan:


Dear Sir,
I'm a 63 year old man learning English in Japan. I'll be glad if you would let me
know the differences in meaning of the following sentences:
1) I'll see you tomorrow; 2) I'm going to see you tomorrow; 3) I'm seeing you
tomorrow; 4) I'll be seeing you tomorrow
Thank you - future forms

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Gareth Rees:
Well, thank you very much for this question and indeed, talking about the future in
English is not straightforward, partly because we don't have one specific future
tense.
You have asked about four forms which are often confused - and they are often
confused because they are, in fact, confusing! They are confusing because the
differences between these forms are not fixed or absolute. Sometimes all four
forms might be suitable for a situation. Today, I'll talk about each form
individually.
Now, remember that the context for these sentences seems to be social or work

plans for tomorrow.


The first example:
'I'll see you tomorrow.' - This is 'will' + the infinitive. We use this form when we
speak at the same time that we make a decision about the future plan. For
example:
'When can you give me an answer?'
'Well, I'll see you tomorrow. Is that okay?'
Now, the second example:
'I'm going to see you tomorrow' - This is 'to be going to' + the infinitive. We use
this form when we have made the decision and plan before we speak. We are
telling someone what we have already decided or agreed to do.
Look at these two examples to compare the first two forms:
1. 'They say the weather will be nice tomorrow'
'Really? Oh well, in that case, I think I'll go to the beach'
2. 'They say the weather will be nice tomorrow'
'I know - I checked the news yesterday. I'm going to go to the beach. Would you
like to come?'
So, you can see the difference between these two forms. In the first one, the
decision is made at the time of speaking. In the second one, the decision was made
earlier; the plan has been made.
Now, the third form:
'I'm seeing you tomorrow' - This is the present continuous with a future
meaning. We use it to talk about definite plans and arrangements. Things have
been decided already, and arrangements have been made. As you can see, this is
very similar in use to 'to be going to'.
Importantly, we generally use the present continuous when we are thinking about a
particular time in the future. And it is commonly used to talk about social plans
and meetings. On a Friday at work, the most common question is probably:
'What are you doing this weekend?'
Finally, the last form:
"I'll be seeing you tomorrow." - This is 'will' + the continuous infinitive. We use
this form when we want to bring some of the meaning of the continuous form to
our description of future events.

The continuous form emphasises that an activity is happening at a certain time,


and this activity lasts for a limited period of time. This meaning is now combined
with one meaning of 'will' - namely that 'will' can describe future facts or
predictions.
So, if you want to describe a future event and you want to emphasis the activity
that will take place over time of this event, you say:
'At this time tomorrow, I'll be swimming in the sea. No more work for me - I'm on
holiday!'
I hope this helps you understand these four forms a little better. Remember that 'to
be going to' and the present continuous both suggest that plans have been made
already. 'Will' is used for spontaneous decisions and 'will be doing' emphasises the
action at a particular time in the future.
Anyway, time to finish. I'm meeting my boss in an hour and I haven't read the
report yet!
Gareth Rees has been an English language teacher and teacher trainer for over
10 years. He is currently a lecturer at London Metropolitan University and his
first course book for English Language learners is due to be published in the near
future.
Learn It

Planned future actions


Timur from Belarus writes:
Are there any differences in the use of present
progressive, future progressive and be going to for
planned future actions? Can you give me more examples
of when we should use future progressive?
Roger Woodham replies:
be going to: I'm going to visit my cousins in Leeds over the
coming weekend.
future progressive: I'll be visiting my cousins in Leeds over

the coming weekend.


present progressive: I'm visiting my cousins in Leeds over
this coming weekend.
We can use all three of these forms to talk about planned future
actions, Timur, and there is not a great deal of difference
between them.
I'm visiting my cousins in Leeds over this coming weekend.
The present progressive is most used for arrangements in the
near future, usually when time and place have already been
decided:
What are you doing after the lesson?
I'm meeting Ronnie for a coffee.
Where are you meeting him?.
I'm meeting him under the clock at Victoria Station.
What are you doing tonight?
I'm staying in. I've got loads of emails to reply to.
I'll be visiting my cousins in Leeds over this coming
weekend. The future progressive is also used to refer to
planned future events. We often use it to make polite enquiries
about people's plans:
Will you be staying in tonight?
No I won't. I'm going out. I have to see Brian to plan the trip to
Greece.
Will you be staying in Bristol for very long?
No, just for a few days. Then we're moving on to Cardiff.
We can also use the future progressive for making predictions
about what will happen over a period of time in the future:
This time next year I shall be working for Gabriel in Brazil.

While you're revising for your exams, I shall be relaxing on a


beach but I will be thinking of you!
Note that while we can use future progressive and be going to
future for making predictions, we cannot use the present
progressive in this way:
Look at those dark clouds. It will be raining here very soon
Look at those dark clouds. It's going to rain here before long.
(BUT NOT: Look at those dark clouds. It's raining here before
long.)
I'm going to visit my cousins in Leeds over this coming
weekend.
If we put it this way, we are focusing our attention on intentions
rather than on previous arrangements. Thus, be going to is used
to talk about both predictions and intentions:
They're going to get married some time next year. ~ When? ~
They're planning to get married in the summer, I think, but
there's no date yet.
Have you noticed that Irene seems to be putting on weight?
Haven't you heard? She's going to have a baby.
They're going to win this match. They're three - nil up and
there's only ten minutes left to play.
I'm to visit my cousins in Leeds over this coming weekend.
Note that we use the be to future to refer to arrangements that
have been made on our behalf, often of an official nature:
The Prince is to visit three inner-city schools and to open the
new wing of the hospital before he takes his Easter holiday.
Sven-Goran Eriksson is to manage the England team until 2008.
He signed a new contract yesterday.

A question from Anna in the Netherlands:


What's the difference in meaning between 'will' and 'going to'. So should I say for
instance 'I will go the market at four' or should it be: 'I'm going to the market at
four?'

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Sian Harris answers:
Based on your actual examples, 'I will go to the market at 4' and 'I'm going to the
market at 4', I think it's actually worth looking at 3 possible verb forms for the
future: Will, going to do, and finally, in the case of your example, I'm going.
So let's start by looking at how we use will and the bare infinitive, as in your
example 'will go'. This verb tense is known as the future simple, and has several
functions. One of the most common is to express a prediction, that is a guess or a
subjective opinion, about the future, when we've not made any definite
arrangement, but just think that something is probable, or likely to happen at the
time of speaking.
If I asked you the question: who do you think will win the World Cup? I'm
guessing that you (Anna) might say 'I think Holland will win', and you might also
feel really confident about that. But I think even the most passionate football
supporter would agree the final result (of a football tournament that hasn't yet
finished) can't be thought of as definite or something that has been arranged in
advance.
In a similar way, we also use 'will' for decisions, offers, promises or threats that are
spontaneous, or made quickly at the moment of speaking. The speaker hasn't
decided before. If you saw the sun was shining outside, you might say 'It's a
beautiful day, I think I'll, or I will, go for a swim later,' or 'maybe I'll phone my
friends and organise a picnic'.
In all of these situations, the common link is that there are no definite
arrangements for these events. No decision has been made before speaking.
Moving on now to a different structure: Going to + bare infinitive, which is

sometimes used quite interchangeably with 'will'. This has a particular function for
stronger predictions, perhaps when there's some present evidence to suggest
something will happen: 'Ella's a really good student, I think she's going to be a
brain surgeon when she gets older.'
We also use this structure when we have a personal intention, or are making a
resolution or decision to do something, as in, 'I'm going to stop eating so much
chocolate this year'.
In a context where you have not only decided to do something but also made all
the arrangements, sometimes referred to as 'diary future', we're more likely to use a
present verb tense, the present continuous ? am/is/are + ING form of the verb, as
you have in your second sentence 'I'm going to the market at 4'. We use this form
for future events that are booked and already arranged, and which we consequently
feel are definitely going to happen. For example, I'm flying to France on Sunday,
we're buying a house or I'm meeting my boss at 2.
So while there's often a confusion between these forms I hope those examples
have helped to clarify the key difference for you. Thanks Anna.
Sian Harris is the Manager of English Language Training & Development at the
BBC World Service, and runs specialist courses in London and overseas for BBC
staff. Before joining the BBC, she spent 10 years as an English language teacher,
examiner and academic manager in schools and colleges in London.
A question from Marcel Fehlmann in Switzerland:
Good afternoon. Using 'going to' for the future: Is it more natural to say 'I'm going
to go snowboarding' or 'I'm going snowboarding'? Thank you for your answer.

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Amos Paran answers:

Well, Marcel, what it really depends on is to what extent your plans to go


snowboarding are fixed, or not.
The present progressive is used for plans and arrangements that are pretty well
definite and fixed. So, if I say I am going to the doctor tomorrow, this means
that I have an appointment, or that there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that I
will do this. I am going to go to the doctor tomorrow means that I am planning
to do so, I intend to do so - but I am less certain about it.
So, in my case, I would say I am flying to Hungary next month because I
already have the ticket. But I would say I am going to go to Italy for my summer
holiday this year because in fact I've not finalised my plans and may yet change
them.
Amos Paran is the Course Leader of the MA in Teaching of English to Speakers of
Other Languages (TESOL) by Distance Learning at the Institute of Education,
University of London. His main teaching and research interests are reading in a
foreign language and the use of literature in foreign language teaching and
learning.
Learning English

The future and the future seen from the


past

Siegfried Leistner from Germany writes:


Can you please explain the difference in
meaning between:
I'm leaving tomorrow.
I'll leave tomorrow.
I'll be leaving tomorrow.
I'm going to leave tomorrow.
Thank you very much for your reply
Bjoco from Romania writes:
I have a sentence whose meaning is not clear
to me: I was going to call you. Why
doesn't the speaker say: I wanted to call
you?
Roger Woodham replies:

I'll reply to the second question first.

You could say: I wanted to call you, Bjoco. The meaning is


roughly the same although if you use wanted, the idea of the
speaker's intention of calling is not so strong. Closer equivalents
would be: I intended to call you / I was intending to call you.
The future seen from the past
Sometimes when we are discussing past events, we want to refer to
something that was in the future at that time. In order to express
this idea, we can use the past tenses of the verbs we would
normally use to talk about the future. Thus,
is going to > was going to

I'm going to leave Britain to start a new life in Canada. >


When I heard that she was going to leave Britain to start a
new life in Canada, I was quite upset.

Other future verb forms change in the same way:


present progressive > past progressive:

We're meeting Jane outside the town hall at three o' clock.
>
We left school before the classes were over because we
were meeting Jane outside the town hall at three o' clock.

will > would

If I play my CDs while I'm working, it won't disturb you,


will it? > I didn't think my music would disturb her, but it
did.

future progressive: will + be + verb-ing > would + be + verbing:

Don't phone them now, they'll be having supper.


I didn't want to phone them at that time because I thought
they would be having supper.

future perfect: will have + past participle > would have + past
participle:

I'll have finished writing up this report by noon, so we will


be able to watch the tennis this afternoon.

Now for your question, Siegfried.


Talking about the future
When we want to refer to the future itself, we tend to use the
present progressive, future progressive and going to
future for things that are already decided or fairly certain to
happen:

We shan't be going to Glastonbury for the festival this


year. We're going to Val and Keith's wedding instead.
It's being held in a castle in Ireland.
I'm going to give the house a thorough clean this
weekend. It's absolutely filthy.

We use the will / shall future for things which are much more
open or have not already been decided:

What will you have to drink? ~ I'll have a cappuccino


and one of those sticky buns.
I've got a hospital appointment this afternoon. ~ I'll
come with you, if you like.
I'm quite worried about it. ~ Don't worry. I'm sure it'll
be all right.

Learn It

We are to / we are not to


Henrique A da Silva from Brazil writes:
Ive been living in the US for a few months and Ive had
opportunity to read some articles and books more easily.
But Ive had doubts about some constructions. I wonder
how it is that to is used in these sentences:
PM to meet Espada today
Spanish mob gathers at border UN to mediate
Also, do the words mob and crowd have the same
meaning and usage?
Roger Woodham replies:

he is to / they are to
We use this structure quite a lot to talk about official plans and
arrangements. In your examples, Enrique, the verb be is omitted
which is very characteristic of newspaper headlines. In any text
follow the headline it would need to be included, e.g.
The British Prime Minister, the French President and the
German Chancellor are to meet in Berlin this weekend.
Note that we can also use this structure as a perfect infinitive to
describe a planned event that did not take place:
The British PM was to have had talks with his Canadian
counterpart on his way to the US, but these were cancelled when
the trip was curtailed. I was to have gone on holiday with Ruth,
but she couldnt get time off work.
In a more informal register, was supposed to has a similar
meaning:
I was supposed to go on holiday with Ruth, but she couldnt get
time off work.
you are not to I am to
Note that this structure can also be used to issue or to
acknowledge instructions or orders. When it is used in negative
sentences, it nearly always has this meaning, but it can be used
in affirmative sentences with this meaning too
We are to smoke only in the designated areas. We are not to
smoke anywhere else.
We are to look after our neighbours dog while they are away
but were not to feed him any chocolate. Else he will be sick.
There is future meaning here, but it also means at any time,
particularly in negative sentences. As we are acknowledging an
instruction, we could also use we mustnt in these sentences
instead of were not to.
Here are some more examples of this usage. Look at these
instructions to members of a youth club in an inner-city area:

1 Respect yourself and other members.


2 No scrapping or fighting and no weapons.
3 No bullying, cussing or dissing.
4 No setting off fire alarms unless there is fire.
5 No climbing on the roof.
6 Entrance through front door only, not back door.
We can re-phrase these instructions, using are to / are not to.
We can also use be permitted to or be allowed to as an
alternative to mustnt as the obligation is imposed externally. (I
have also tried to paraphrase youth-culture vocabulary in this rewording):
1 You are to respect yourself and other members at all times.
2 There is to be no scrapping or fighting and no weapons of any
kind are permitted.
3 You mustnt bully anyone and you are not allowed to swear at
anyone or insult other members.
4 Fire alarms are not to be set off unless there is fire.
5 Climbing on the roof is not permitted.
6 You are to enter the youth club only through the front door, not
through the back entrance.
mob / crowd
A mob is a large crowd of people that is difficult to control. It
often collocates with the adjectives angry or unruly. (Unruly =
undisciplined):
An unruly mob surrounded the parliament building.
Crowd is more neutral and simply describes a large gathering of
people.
Crowds can be peaceful or angry:
He is a brilliant orator and attracted a crowd of 5000 to
Speakers Corner in Hyde Park.
An angry crowd had gathered outside the police station.
Learning English

Future forms: I'm to / etc

Young from South Korea writes:


Hi. I'd like to know how to use be to, especially
in this way below: I'm to sleep on the sofa
tonight.
I'm not sure if this example is right or not, but I
hear this sort of expression pretty often. I guess
it might be a future form. I'm waiting for your
answer.
Roger Woodham replies:

be to + infinitive
You're quite right, Young. This is a future form. When we say
that things are to happen, we are talking about official
arrangements and formal instructions that are imposed on us
by other people. This structure is quite common in news reports
and official notices of various kinds:

Laboratory equipment is not to be left unattended in the


science labs.
This medicine is to be taken three times daily after
meals.
All visitors entering the hospital are to wear masks as
protection against infection.
Manchester City are to return to their famous sky-blue
shirts next season after agreeing a sponsorship deal
with Reebok.

It is also frequently used by parents or other responsible adults


to give instruction to children:

You are not to leave the school hall until your parents
arrive to collect you.
You're not to use your mobile phone for long
conversations. It's too costly!
I'm to clean up my room before I'm allowed to go out.
She can go out tonight, but she's not to be late back.

be to + infinitive in if clauses
This structure is also very common in if-clauses when we are
discussing pre-conditions:

If we are to survive global warming, large-scale


deforestation must be avoided.
If he is to get into the first team, he must improve his

diet and spend more time training.

If they are to get there by nightfall, they must press on.


They can't afford to hang on here, waiting for the others
to arrive.

future: present progressive


Note that we normally use the present progressive for fixed
plans and personal arrangements in the near future that we
have decided for ourselves:

What are we having for supper tonight? ~ I'm preparing


a Thai dish: red chicken curry, yellow vegetable curry
and sticky rice.

Penny tells me you're seeing Felicity tomorrow. ~ Yes, I


am. ~ Where are you meeting her? ~ I'm meeting her
at school and then we're going for a coffee.

future: present simple


Note that we use the present simple for fixed arrangements
when they are part of a timetable or schedule:

When do the Easter holidays start in your school? ~


They don't start until Good Friday and they are over by
Easter Monday.

You know that David's coming down for Easter. Do you


know what time his train gets in? ~ It doesn't get in
until nearly midnight. Are you planning to meet him.

other immediate future expressions


be about to + infinitive
be on the point of + verb-ing
be set to + infinitive

I was about to get into the bath when the doorbell rang.
Is that Sarah? ~ Yes, it is. You're lucky to have caught
me. I was just about to leave.

I was on the point of handing in my notice when they


offered me promotion.

The talks are set to continue throughout next week if


necessary in the hope of avoiding a strike.

Learning English

be to + infinitive

Julio Molina from Peru asks:


I like the learning English section of the BBC web
pages so much. Please, can you explain the use
of the verb to be + to in these examples:

You are not to smoke

They are to be married soon

Roger replies:

more
questions

We use be to + infinitive when discussing formal or official


arrangements or to give formal instructions or orders and your
examples illustrate these aspects very well. Further examples
might be:

The Prime Minister is to make a further visit to


Devon next week.

We are to receive a pay rise in line with inflation in


September.

I don't mind her going to Ruth's party but she's

not to be back late.

You are not to leave this house without my


permission. Is that clear?

The be to + infinitive structure is also frequently used in


newspaper, radio and television reports to refer to future events.
It expresses near certainty that what is forecast will happen.
Study the following:

A man is to appear in court later this morning


charged with the murder of the footballer, Darren
Gough.

The Ministry of Trade and Industry has announced


that it is to move three thousand jobs out of the
capital and re-locate them in the North East.

Work is to begin this week on the new bridge


across the Nile north of Aswan.

We often use be to + infinitive in the if-clause in conditional


sentences when talking about preconditions for something to
happen. Study the following:

If we are to catch that train, we shall have to leave


now.

If I were to increase my offer from five hundred to


five hundred and fifty pounds, would you be
interested in selling me your car then?

If we are to solve the world's pollution problems,


we must address environmental issues now.

Be to + passive infinitive is often used when giving


instructions. It is noticeable always on medicine bottles and can
be seen on other official notices too:

To be taken three times a day after meals.

These benches are not to be removed from the


changing rooms.

No food of any kind is to be taken into the


examination room.

Note that although this structure is used to talk about current


and future arrangements and events, it is configurated in
present and past tenses - see the above examples. However, be
to + perfect infinitive is sometimes used to show that a
planned event did not materialise:

He was to have appeared in the West End show but


broke his collar bone during rehearsals.

They were to have picked strawberries this


morning, but the torrential overnight rain made the
field too muddy.

Sammy was to have married Sarah but then Jamie


came along and the engagement ring he had given
her was returned.

A question from Zuzana:


Hello. I am Zuzana; I am calling from the Czech Republic. And I would like to
know if there is any serious stylistic difference between 'I shall' and 'I will' in the
future simple tense, and if 'I will' is, for example, unacceptable in a particular
society, and if 'I will' can be considered as a mistake in an exam.

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
George Pickering answers:
Well Zuzana, thank you very much for your very interesting question. The first
thing I want to say is I wouldn't worry about trying to use 'shall' rather than 'will'. I
can think of no social situations where using 'will' instead of 'shall' would cause
social offence.
In fact, in modern English, 'shall' is rarely used in American English and only in
specific situations in British English. 'Will' is the dominant form today.
So when giving information about the future and making predictions, we can use

either 'shall' or 'will' with the 'I' and 'we' forms.


So we can say either, 'I shall be ready at 8 o'clock' or 'I will be ready at 8 o'clock'.
In both cases the contracted form is 'I'll'.
We would normally use 'will' with 'you', 'he', 'she', 'it' and 'they'.
For example, 'Tomorrow it will be cold and foggy with light showers in the east.'
Do you understand?
Zuzana responds:
Yeah, I understand it. Thank you.
George responds:
That's great.
George Pickering is an educational coach, consultant and trainer. He is an
associate tutor at the University of Sheffield, and a British Council inspector of
language schools in the UK.
A question from Ben in Germany:
Hi, my name is Ben, I'm from Germany, I live in Rostock. My question is what is
the difference between "How long will you be staying in London?" and "How long
will you stay in London?" What's the difference?

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Callum Robertson answers:
This is quite a difficult question to answer. First off, I should say that if you used
either of these forms you would be understood without difficulty and they are both
asking for the same information. The answer would be a period of time, three
weeks, 10 minutes, a couple of years, for example.

But which is the most natural, which are you likely to hear? Well first let's look at
the different forms. How long will you stay in London? This is what's commonly
called the 'future simple'. How long will you be staying in London is the 'future
continuous', also called the 'future progressive'.
To understand the difference, I think it might be useful to look at an example
showing the differences between a present simple and continuous.
Let's compare these two - "I work in London" and "I'm working in London". Both
of these are similar in that they identify the place where I work. One form is
present simple, "I work in London", the other, "I'm working in London", is present
continuous.
So which is correct? Well, the answer is both of them are correct, depending on the
attitude of the person who is speaking. One of the general meanings of simple verb
forms is that they describe things that are seen to be a fact, a statement of what is
believed to be true and therefore permanent. Often there isn't actually any time
connection with the present simple. This might sound strange, but think of a
sentence like - "Fish live in water" - this is a statement of fact which is always
true, past present and future, there is no real time connection.
In our example, "I work in London", this is just my stating a fact about me in the
same way.
Now, "I'm working in London" is a little different. There's more information here.
Present continuous verb forms are often used to describe things which the speaker
believes to be temporary or in progress. They started before now and will end
sometime after now. So this suggests perhaps that if I say "I'm working in
London", I don't necessarily believe that to be a permanent thing, I imagine that
sometime in the future I might work somewhere else.
So, in very simple terms you could say that often simple verb forms are for
permanent things and continuous verb forms for temporary things.
Now, let's go back to the original question - "How long will you stay?" or "How
long will you be staying?"
I think it would probably be unusual for a native speaker to say "How long will
you stay?" This is the future simple. Simple forms often go with permanent ideas but if you are asking someone this question, then you believe that they will not
stay permanently, their stay will be temporary, they're going to leave at some
point. So I don't think it quite matches. I don't think we'd use the future simple to
ask a question about a temporary condition.

If someone is visiting you or your country, I think it'll be much more likely that
we'd ask, 'How long will you be staying.'
Naser from Iran asks:
Would / going to

I would like to know what is the difference between


would and is going to, for instance:
How long would it take? and How long is going to take?
Another example:
It would effect you and It is going to effect you
Many thanks
Listen and download
Real
mp3 (1 MB)
Transcript (50 K)
Catherine Chapman answers:

Hello Naser and thanks very much for your question! Now,
first of all, before we answer your question, I'd like to have a quick look at the
grammar of what you wrote. We need to add a subject to your sentence. You said
How long is going to take? and in fact we need a subject in there so it would say
How long is it going to take? And regarding your use of the word effect, you need
to use it with an a not an e.
Right, now we've sorted your questions out, let's have a look at the difference between
the two forms, that's would and going to. And here we've got an example conversation:

Woman: I've just heard - my PhD proposal's been accepted! I'm going to start my
research next year.
Man:

How exciting! How long is it going to take?

The woman has used going to because she's talking about future plans, that's things which
are definitely going to happen. So the man also uses going to because he's asking for
more information about the plans.
Now, we can also use going to, not just for certainties but for things which are probably
going to happen. So, sometimes we use going to with 1st conditional sentences to express
a strong possibility or probability. Here's an example:
If you drink the whole bottle of medicine, it is going to affect you very badly.
And that was a 1st conditional sentence with if and present simple with going to, which
shows the likely result.
We can also use modal verbs and first conditionals, like this:
If you drink the whole bottle of medicine, it might affect you very badly.
So the modal verb with that 1st conditional sentence is might, and it shows quite a strong
possibility.
Now let's have a look at the modal verb would. And here's an example dialogue:

Woman: Are you thinking of doing a masters' degree?


Man:

Oh, they're so expensive! I can't afford to stop work, so I'd have to do it


part-time.

Woman: Part-time? How long would it take?


Now this time, we're not talking about plans, and we're not talking about strong
possibilities or something that's probably going to happen. With this sentence, we're
talking about possibilities, things we're thinking about, but we haven't made a plan about
them. So, in this situation, we use modal verbs like would and could to express the idea of
smaller possibility, or improbability, or even impossibility, like we do with 2nd
conditionals. Here's an example of a 2nd conditional with would to express a small
possibility:
If you drank the whole bottle of medicine, it would affect you very badly.
The difference, then, between would and going to: going to we often use for plans, or
things that we think are probably going to happen, like we do with 1st conditional

sentences. But for things which are less likely to happen, impossible, improbable or even
just talking about dreams and ideas, we use 2nd conditional sentences and we use would.
Thanks for your question Naser, and I do hope my answer's going to be useful!

About Catherine Chapman


Catherine Chapman has a BA (hons) in Communication Studies, CTEFLA,
DELTA and a Masters Degree in Educational Technology and English Language
Teaching with Manchester University (UK). She has taught EFL, EAP and IT
skills in several countries, worked in ELT management and has developed webbased ELT/EAP materials projects in institutions including Istanbul Technical
University (Turkey) and Newcastle University (UK). She now works as an ELT
Writer for BBC Learning English.
Tue Thuc from Vietnam asks:
The future progressive

Samantha, I have a question for you. I am a


Vietnamese and I speak French, and so I have some problems with the continuous
tense in English. Actually, I cant really find out the difference between Ill miss
you and Ill be missing you. Can you explain to me?
Listen and download
Real
mp3 (957 K)
Samantha answers:

Transcript (46 K)

Well hi Thuc, thats a great question! And Ill just say youre
not the first student to feel confused about the different forms of the future tense!
But lets start with Ill miss you. Were using the future with will here, to let someone
know that well feel sad about not being with them. And in this example, no time is
mentioned, so although these people will miss each other, we dont know whether or
when theyll be meeting again. And Ill miss you is just a simple statement of a fact.

But in the sentence Ill be missing you, were using the future progressive to express the
same feeling, but the emphasis is slightly different. The use of the progressive verb
missing emphasises the continuation of the feeling, because the condition or action is
ongoing. Because the progressive form of the verb is associated with action, it draws
attention to the actual experience of something. So the difference between Ill miss you
and Ill be missing you is that the use of the future progressive has a bit more power
because it highlights the constant experience of loneliness or loss. However, Ill be
missing you also seems to suggest that the two people will meet again, because we could
almost add a second part to the sentence - Ill be missing you until I see you again.
And theres a line in a famous song which sums up the power of the future progressive,
but dont worry Thuc, Im not going to sing to you now! But listen to this:
Ill be seeing you in all the old familiar places
The use of the future progressive here draws attention to the fact that the person will be
constantly reminded or haunted by the memory of his lover. If the line had been Ill see
you in all the old familiar places, I dont think the song would be remembered today the
way it is! Ill see you in all the old familiar places is quite factual and it doesnt conjure
up the image of an unhappy lover enduring a painful separation.
Similarly, Ill think of you on the airplane could mean Ill think of you once or twice but
Ill be thinking about you on the airplane suggests that Ill constantly be thinking about
you.
Well, Ill be thinking about you Thuc, and I hope that you found these explanations
useful!
Tue Thuc responds:
OK, thank you!

About Samantha
Samantha has been a teacher of English language and communication skills for
the past sixteen years. She taught in Japan for many years, but is now based at
Newcastle University, where she teaches on an MA in Translating and
Interpreting, as well as preparatory EFL programmes.
Agata from Poland asks:
Quite recently a group of English learners from
Poland got interested in the following question:
What grammatical constructions are possible after a
verb "hope"?

A lot of doubts were connected with proper usage of "will" after verb "hope".
Could you please provide elaborate and easy to understand answer to such
question in "Ask About English" section?
Thank you in advance
Agata
P.S - Curious members of www.ang.pl* forum cannot wait to hear from your
experts
Hope

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Mark Shea answers:
Hi Agata,
It sounds like we'd better try to satisfy everyone's curiosity as quickly as possible!
The verb 'hope' is actually quite flexible. It's typical to use the present tense with 'hope'
to give a future meaning "I hope that you have a good time," for example.
This is just like 'if' in the first conditional "I'll call you if anything happens."
But it's also possible to use 'will' in certain contexts "I hope that you will be able to finish on time." OR...

"I hope that you'll visit us again in the near future."


In almost all cases, the 'will' could be replaced by the present tense with little or no
difference in meaning, but it doesn't always work the other way round.
"I hope that he has his passport with him." cannot always be changed to:
"I hope that he will have his passport with him."
as the first one has both present and future meaning, but the second one can only have
future meaning.
So hope + the present tense is rather more flexible than hope + will, but sometimes they
mean the same thing.
Some more examples...
"They hope that you'll remember your promise"
is almost the same as:
"They hope that you remember your promise", but "I hope that you agree to the proposal" might mean that you've already seen or heard the proposal, but if someone says:
"I hope that you will agree to the proposal" it is less likely that you've seen it already and perhaps the proposal may not have been
made yet.
The present continuous can also be used with 'hope' and here the difference between
present and future is even stronger. If someone says:
"I hope that you're thinking of me"...
it clearly means that they hope the person is thinking of them right now, but "I hope that you'll be thinking of me"
obviously refers to some time in the future.

So to sum up, it's probably better to use hope + present, as this is more flexible, and only
ever use hope + will if you are very clear that your meaning is in the future.
I hope that you and your friends have enjoyed all my examples, Agata!

Mark Shea has been a teacher and teacher trainer for fifteen years. He has taught
English and trained teachers extensively in Asia and South America, and is a
qualified examiner for the University of Cambridge oral examinations. He is
currently working with journalists and is the author of the BBC College of
Journalism's online English tutor.
Dani from Brazil asks:
I would like to know when may I or may I not use 'I
was' and when may I or may not use 'I were'.
What's the difference between them?
Thank you very much
Dani
I was and I were

Ask about English


Listen to the answer
Mark Shea answers:
Hi Dani,
This is a very interesting question, and to answer it we need to have a little look at
history.
English is a member of the Indo-European group of languages - it includes
Germanic languages, that's languages like English and German, Romance

languages like Italian and Portuguese, Persian languages and many of the
languages of the Indian subcontinent. And these languages all shared a common
ancestor - for those of you who are interested, it was called proto-Indo-European.
This language divided ideas into things which are real on the one hand, and things
which are imaginary on the other.
This difference still exists in Latin languages like Portuguese, where you have
indicative tenses to describe real things and subjunctive tenses to describe things
which are 'wishes', 'untrue at the moment' or 'imaginary'.
If you translate the two sentences:
'He comes every Tuesday' and 'I hope he comes'
into Portuguese, the form of the verb is probably different - the first is indicative
and the second is subjunctive.
English makes the same distinction, but it's much easier as subjunctive forms are
usually identical to indicative forms, so you can't tell the difference. Basically 'I
was' is indicative 'I was having dinner when you called' or 'I was happy' - both describe real
situations.
'I were' is subjunctive.
'If I were you, I wouldn't go' is not a real situation, as I cannot be you ...
'If I were you, I wouldn't go'.
It's very common to use the 'I were' construction in sentences with 'if' - or
conditional sentences. This is correct, and technically speaking:
'If I was you ...' is incorrect, at least in formal speech and writing.
Unfortunately, it is quite common to hear native speakers say it, and it might be
that the subjunctive form is gradually disappearing from English.
The subjunctive form is a little more flexible though - we can use inversion with
the subjunctive, so instead of saying:
'If I were rich, I would build a new house for my family' we can say:
'Were I rich, I would build a new house for my family'.

Although some people might say:


'If I was rich, I would build a new house for my family' I don't think anyone would say:
'Was I rich, I would build a new house for my family'!
This flexibility might mean that 'I were' survives, at least in formal
communication. I think that's a good thing!
Thanks, Dani.
Mark Shea has been a teacher and teacher trainer for fifteen years. He has taught
English and trained teachers extensively in Asia and South America, and is a
qualified examiner for the University of Cambridge oral examinations. He is
currently working with journalists and is the author of the BBC College of
Journalism's online English tutor.
Learning English

Bare infinitive

Wolfgang Drescher from Germany


writes:
What is the difference between:
President Bush has announced a plan to help
prevent the spread of the AIDS virus.
President Bush has announced a plan to help
to prevent the spread of the AIDS virus.
Roger Woodham replies:

The difference is one of form only. There is no difference in


meaning.

to-infinitive or bare infinitive


Help is a verb that can be used with or without to and with or
without an object before the infinitive. When we use it without an
infinitive it sometimes sounds more informal. Compare the
following:

Could you help me to look for my car keys? I can't find


them anywhere.

Could you help me look for my car keys? I can't find them
anywhere.
Would you like to help to cook dinner tonight? It's late and
I'm feeling tired.
Would you like to help cook dinner tonight? It's late and
I'm feeling tired.

There are one or two other structures where to-infinitive and the
bare infinitive are both possible. Expressions with do or did, such
as what I've done or all I did can follow either pattern.

I hate shopping so what I've done is (to) order a new


computer over the Internet.

All I did was (to) suggest that she should lend him no
more money. I didn't insist on it.

When two infinitive structures are connected by and, or or, except


or but and than or as, it is normal practice to omit to in the second
clause. Compare the following:

I would like you to tidy the house and (to) wash the dishes
before I get home.

Would you prefer to have a snack now or (to) wait until


later before we eat?
I could find nothing to do this afternoon, except read my
book.
My son does nothing but watch TV when he gets home
from school.
It's quicker to bike to the station rather than take the car.

I have to fix breakfast for everybody as well as take the


children to school before I can leave for work.

Bare infinitive only

Generally speaking, bare infinitive structures are much less


common than to-infinitive structures, but after certain verbs they
are necessary.
We use the infinitive without to after modal auxiliary verbs will,
shall, would, could, can (but not be able to), may, might, must
(but not have to), should (but not ought to), and needn't, (but not
need to, which behaves like a normal verb). Compare the
following:

I can't agree with you on this, though I would like to be


able to help you.

You must finish your own work before you go out, but you
don't have to help your sister.
It will be hot and sunny today so you should put on plenty
of sunscreen and you ought to wear a hat.
He needn't take time off work, but he needs to rest in the
evenings and get a good night's sleep before he sets off on
the new expedition.

After the object after certain verbs, such as hear, see, make, let,
there is no to:

I saw him pour the medicine down the loo and I heard him
laugh to himself.

I cannot make you take this medication, I can only ask you
to take it.
I can't let you go to bed hungry. You must let me prepare
you some supper.

After verbal idioms would rather and had better there is no to:

I'd rather swim in the pool than go down to the beach.


Geoffrey has just driven up in his car. You'd better see what
he wants.

All of these, however, represent exceptions to the general rule.


Most infinitive structures begin with to:

I decided to leave work early. I intended to be home before


six. And I had arranged to play tennis with Joan in the
evening.

Arun from India asks:


-ing participle clauses

Which is correct? 'I could hear the dog barking' or 'I


could hear the dog's barking'?

Listen and download


Real
mp3 (1.1 MB)
Transcript (30 K)
Catherine Chapman answers:

Hi Arun and thanks for your question.


I could hear the dog's barking is grammatically correct. The dog's barking uses a
possessive 's and means the barking of the dog.
However, you have used the verb hear which gives the idea that you could hear
something that was happening at the time you are speaking about. So it would be more
appropriate to use the participle clause barking to give more information about the dog.
The preferred phrase would be I could hear the dog barking.
So let's look more closely at -ing participle clauses.
We use ing participle clauses to give more information about what was happening at a
particular time.

Did you speak to the man wearing the grey jacket? (the man who was wearing a grey
jacket)
The lady working behind the counter is very busy. (the lady who is working behind the
counter)
I could hear the dog barking. (the dog which was barking)
We can also use ing participle clauses to talk about something that happens all the time.
At the end of the road there is a path leading to the station. (a path which leads to the
station)
The agent has a website giving details of all the properties for sale. (a website which
gives details of all the properties for sale)
With the verbs see, hear, watch, and listen to, the meaning can change depending on
whether an -ing participle is used. Compare these sentences:
Stella saw the children cross the road.
Stella saw the children crossing the road.
In the first one - Stella saw the children cross the road - the use of cross in the simple
form implies that Stella saw the complete action she saw the children cross the road
from start to finish. But in the second one - Stella saw the children crossing the road the
use of the participle suggests that Stella saw the children while they were crossing the
road she didn't see the complete action. So in your example sentence Arun, I could hear
the dog barking suggests that the dog was already barking when you heard it and
probably continued barking even when you had left.
I hope that's answered your question Arun!
Catherine

About Catherine Chapman


Catherine Chapman has a BA (hons) in Communication Studies, CTEFLA,
DELTA and a Masters Degree in Educational Technology and English Language
Teaching with Manchester University (UK). She has taught EFL, EAP and IT
skills in several countries, worked in ELT management and has developed webbased ELT/EAP materials projects in institutions including Istanbul Technical
University (Turkey) and Newcastle University (UK). She now works as an ELT
Writer for BBC Learning English.
Learning English

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Both Zbyszek from Poland and Iqbal


Ahmad from Pakistan write that they find
it difficult to differentiate between transitive
and intransitive verbs: 'Please explain the
difference and give us some examples.'

Roger Woodham replies:

Intransitive verbs: subject + verb


If an action concerns only one person or thing, you mention only
the person or thing that carries out the action (the subject) and the
action itself (the verb). Verbs which describe such actions are
called intransitive verbs, e.g.

I waited and waited, but nobody came.

Many intransitive verbs describe physical behaviour or movement:

As the boys arrived, the girls departed.

The wind subsided, the sun came out and the water
receded.
My shares have collapsed, so I'm going to have to
economise.
His whole body was aching and his medical condition was
deteriorating.
She wept bitterly on hearing this news.

Note from the last example that intransitive verbs are often
followed by a prepositional or adverbial phrase which provides
more information about the action - when it occurs, where it
occurs, how it occurs, what direction it takes, etc. Compare the
following:

I arrived at the station at a quarter past three.

He travelled south with all possible speed.


Katie was standing in the corner and Justin was lying on

the bed.
It happened yesterday. Vicky had behaved quite
unacceptably.
She could not remain in her company, so she turned and
rushed out of the room.

Transitive verbs: subject + verb + object


Transitive verbs involve not only the subject, but also someone or
something else, the object:

She has many friends, but (she) admires Victoria most.

"Blue suits you," she said. "Fashion does not interest me in


the slightest," I replied.
They haven't raised the standard of living much, but I still
support the government.

Some transitive verbs can have two objects, an indirect object


followed by a direct object:

She brought me my breakfast in bed on a silver tray.

He promised me a job as an insurance salesman.


I lent my younger sister all the money I had.

We can also reverse the order of the objects and put the direct
object first by inserting the preposition to before the indirect
object:

I lent all the money I had to my younger sister.

He taught German to all the girls in the school.


The newspaper has offered a reward of 10,000 to anyone
with any information about the robbery.

Note that although they may be followed by adverbial or


prepositional phrases, transitive verbs cannot be used
intransitively. We cannot say:

The newspaper has offered.


That does not interest.
I still support.

as the meaning is incomplete. Neither can we use intransitive verbs


transitively. We cannot say:

I'll have to economise my spending.


His body was aching the pain.

The sun came out the hills.

Intransitive or transitive
Many verbs in English can be used both transitively and
intransitively. The object is often not needed when it is obvious
what you are talking about. But it may need to be added to clarify
what is meant. Compare the following:

I asked him to come in, but he did not enter. He did not
enter the room.

When he entered the room, she was reading. She was


reading a book about Buddhism.
He sat down at the computer and started to type. He started
to type an email to his half sister in Australia.

In these examples, the meaning of the verb does not change whether
it is used transitively or intransitively. With certain verbs, the
meaning does change. Compare the following:

She runs a bed-and-breakfast establishment in Broadstairs.

The bull was chasing him so he ran as quickly as he could.


Do you want any help? ~ No thanks. I can manage perfectly
well on my own.
He had been managing the business for six years before it
made a profit.
I was out when she called.

She called me a cheat and a liar.

Marcela asks:
A very specific question, about grammar. Is there a rule about 'inverted subject
verb word order in conditionals?

Listen to the audio


Download the audio (4mb)
Download the script (10k
pdf)
Try the quiz

Martin Parrott answers:


Yes there is. It sounds terribly complicated - but really there are three examples
when you can, kind of, invert the subject and the verb, and it's easy to learn them but they're not terribly common.
Example 1: Future
The first case is a conditional referring to the future. You might say, if it rains, I'll
stay at home. But, there is an alternative to that. Instead of saying 'if it rains', you
can say 'should it rain'. Now there you're inverting, if you like, the verb should (it's
an auxiliary verb) and the subject - inverting the order. That's for conditionals for
the future: should it rain I'll stay at home, should it be fine, I'll go out. It's a
little bit unusual, and it's a little bit formal.
Example 2: Present
There are two more phrases which involve some degree of inverting (changing
round the subject and the verb). There's also what we sometimes call the second
conditional: they are conditionals where we're talking about the present and
imagining it's the present. It's different in some ways - so I've got a friend who's
really healthy and well and doesn't need looking after, but if he were ill, I'd look
after him.
We have another conditional which is sometimes called the second conditional which we use to refer to things in the present when we imagine if they were
different. So for example: I've got a friend who's really healthy, never ill, never
needs looking after, but [I might imagine it!] if he were ill, what would I do? If
he were ill, I'd look after him. Now there is another way of saying that, which is
were he ill, I'd look after him - and there, we'd invert the auxiliary verb and the
subject. So, instead of he were ill we changed it to were he ill and we leave off
the 'if'.
So that's our second example. Of course, that's quite an interesting one too,
because we're using 'were' instead of 'was' and remember in sentences like this
where we're talking about the present and we're imagining it different (our second
conditional sentences), we can use 'were' instead of 'was' after the subject. We can't
say was he ill, I'd look after him - it's the 'were' here. Were he ill, I'd look after
him, were he miserable, I would try and cheer him up, were he poor, I'd give
him presents.
Example 3: Conditional to talk about the past

Normally if we're talking about the past and imagining if things were different, we
use if and then we use what we call the past perfect tense. So, if I had known he
was tired, I would have gone home earlier (I stayed there all night talking to him;
I didn't know he was tired). If I'd known - I had known - he was tired, I would
have gone home earlier.
There's an alternative to that we can use. Instead of saying if I had known, we
can say had I known. We invert the 'had', the auxiliary verb and the subject so
our alternative to if I had known is had I known. If I had seen him, I would
have spoken to him had I seen him I would have spoken to him. If she had
got the job, she would have been happier had she got the job, she would have
been happier.
All the same
The interesting thing about these three examples is, in a way theyre all the same.
In each of these examples, we get rid of if and then we invert (we change the
order of) the auxiliary verb and the subject. And each of them is more formal than
using if, and each of them suggests that the condition that this if clause, the
condition is a bit less probable.
Learning English

let or leave

Salman from Pakistan writes:


I am 22 years old and have been learning
English for 6 months. I would like to know
the difference between let and leave.
Please explain with examples. I shall be very
grateful to you.

Roger Woodham replies:

We use both let and leave in different ways and for different
purposes. They cannot be used interchangeably.

let + infinitive
A very common usage of let is in the phrase let us or let's
when we are making a suggestion involving others.
We say this instead of Why don't we? or I suggest we
which is quite formal. It is often used with shall we? as a
question tag.
Compare the following:

Let's just have a cold salad for supper this evening,


shall we?
And let's go for a run before we eat!
OK. Let's do that!
Let's forget I ever said that, shall we? I didn't mean to
offend you.

When it is used with the negative there are two alternative


versions to choose from: don't let's or let's not. Both are very
common.

Let's not get too involved in their argument. It's


better if they sort it out themselves.
Don't let's go to Sheila's party tonight. Let's just have
a quiet evening at home

Let is also commonly used to make a suggestion to oneself in


the phrase let me or to a third person in the phrase let
him/her/them. Note also the usage with the infinitive of
there is/there are.
Compare the following:

Do you like this outfit?


Let me see. I like the orange dress but not with that
hat.
I'm going to sell my car. Do you want to buy it?
I'm not sure. Let me think about it.
There's still a stain on this jumper.
Let me try to get it out with this stain remover.
Can Joey and Phoebe stay overnight next weekend? Oh,
please let them stay.
Let there be no doubts in your minds that we shall win
this battle.

Let = allow/permit

We can see from these last examples, particularly the Joey and
Phoebe example, that let also means allow or permit. These
are more formal alternatives and require to before the infinitive.
Compare the following:

Let me say how pleased I am to see you here this


evening.
Allow me to say how pleased I am to see you here this
evening.
Permit me to say how pleased I am to see you here this
evening.
I wouldn't let them stay up after nine to watch the
adult film on TV.
I can't let you go to France without me.

Note that with the passive voice, we have to use permit or


allow:

We didn't let him go home until he had spoken to the


Headteacher.

He wasn't allowed/permitted to go home until he


had spoken to the Headteacher.

let me know/ let me have


Finally, let is frequently used with know, where it means tell,
and have, where it means send or give.
Compare the following:

Please let us know as soon as possible whether you are


able to accept our offer.
If you had let me know earlier, I would have saved it for
you.
Can you let me have those reports by midday on Friday,
please?
Let me have half an hour to think about it and then I'll
let you know.

leave = go (depart/quit/abandon)
As we saw with let, leave has a number of different meanings
and uses.

Compare the following:

The plane left early as everybody was on board half an


hour before take-off. (= departed)
Nobody leaves school at the age of sixteen now, like
they used to. (= stops attending)

Don't tell Maureen I'm leaving her. (= abandoning)


left = remaining
Here it is almost opposite in meaning and is used as a past
participle normally at the end of the clause, often with there
is/are or have got:

I haven't got any cash left. Can you get the sandwiches?
There were only two days' rations left, but they had to
last for six days.

Nothing was left of the castle. It had been completely


destroyed.
leave = let it remain
It is here that the meaning of leave comes closest to let, close
but not identical.
Compare the following:

I'll eat later. Just leave it for me in the fridge.


I left my car in the car park and took the bus into the
town centre.
I can't make the decision. I'll leave it for you / to you to
decide what to do.
I can't get the stove to work.
Leave it with me / to me. I'll deal with it.

This final example combines a number of different usages of let


and leave:

Let me finish off the translation for you.


OK. There are only four pages left. I'll leave it for you. I
have to leave now anyway!

There are even more shades of meaning of leave than we have


covered. Check them out in a good dictionary.

Learning English

'Lie' or 'lay' on a bed

Antonio Shonis in the USA asks:


What's the easy way to remember the difference
between lie and lay ?

more
questions

Roger replies:

lie (+ phrase of place) / lay (+ object)


Perhaps the easiest way to remember the difference, Antonio, is
that lay is a transitive verb which needs an object to complete
its meaning and lie is an intransitive verb which functions
without an object and is followed normally by a phrase of place.

First, see how the words look in the present and the past tense.
Present

Past

lie

he lies..., he is lying...

he lay..., he was lying..., he has


lain...

lay

she lays, she is laying

he laid, he was laying, he has


laid

Now compare the following:


lay ( +
object)

She laid the baby on the bed in order to change


its nappy.

lie ( + phrase She was lying asleep on the sofa when her
of place)
husband arrived home.
lay ( +
object)

Can you lay the table for me please? Lunch is


ready.

I told her not to lie out in the sun, but she must
lie ( + phrase
have lain there for at least an hour for her back
of place)
was very sunburnt.
lay ( +
object)

I had never laid carpets before, but I was


determined to have a go.

lie ( + phrase When I looked out of the aircraft window, I could


of place)
see that London lay beneath us.
lay ( +
object)

His lawyer will lay great emphasis on his state of


mind when the murder was committed and claim
that it was manslaughter, not murder.

None of us knows what lies ahead, but you must


lie ( + phrase
try to take a grip on your life and decide where
of place)
your future lies.

Learning English

'like' as verb and preposition

Jose Luis Luque studying English in the UK


writes:
Could you please tell me the difference
between like as a verb and as a preposition?

Roger Woodham replies:

like
Like as a verb is used mainly to talk about enjoyment,
preferences and habits. It is perhaps not quite as strong in
emotional terms as love, or be fond of or be keen on.
Compare the following:

Do you like cross-country skiing? ~ Yeah, I quite like it


now, but I still prefer downhill.
When Im making a cold drink, I always like to put the
ice and slices of lemon in first.
How did you like the pumpkin soup? ~ Oh, I liked it
very much.
Ive got blackcurrant mousse for desert. Do you like
blackcurrants? ~ Oh, I love them.
Hes a very kind person. I like him very much, but I
could never go out with him.
Im a very social person but I dont like people following
me around all the time.

Note that like is not normally used in the progressive form and

cannot normally be used without an object:

What do you think of the conversation classes? ~ I like


them. (NOT: Im liking them.)
Do you like garage music? ~ Yes, I do. OR: Yes, I like
it. (NOT: Yes, I like.)

would like to = want to


Take care not to confuse like with would like to. They have
quite different meanings. Compare the following and note the
structural differences when using them:

I'd like to / I want to send this parcel by international


recorded delivery, please.
Are you interested in going to the match on Saturday. ~
Yes, I'd like to. / Yes, I want to.
If you'd like to / you want to take your coat off,
please do. It's rather hot in here.
I would like to visit him in hospital, but my wife
doesn't want to. She doesn't like hospitals.
I would have liked to have seen John before he left for
Canada, but Mary didn't want to.

Note that when used for requests and suggestions, would like
to sometimes sounds slightly more polite than want to.
like as preposition
Like as a preposition with nouns or pronouns is used to express
ideas of similarity or comparison. Compare the following:

When she's on stage, she looks a bit like Britney, but


she sounds more like Madonna.
Like you, I prefer to eat my breakfast in the morning
without engaging in small talk.
It was only five o' clock, but it seemed like the middle
of the night, it was so dark.
These plants grow very well in hot countries, like Costa
Rica and Venezuela.
What's Bournemouth like as a seaside town? ~ It's a
little bit like Brighton. Quite lively!

Last updated at 19:09 GMT, Tuesday, 02 November 2010

Likely

It was unlikely that Sarah knew that her boyfriend was a criminal when she first met him
A question from Daniela in Italy:
In English there are many verbs to express possibility or probability, such as may, might,
and could. I am very uncertain how to use the form "to be likely to". Which degree of
probability does it express?
Hello Daniela. Thank you for your question concerning the use of the phrase 'to be likely
to'.
As you say, we use this phrase to talk about the possibility of something happening, and
we often use it to refer to possible future events. For example:

'The American swimmer is likely to win the race tomorrow.'


'They are likely to ask you about your knowledge of computers in the
interview, so you should prepare for that.'

When we use this phrase, we are saying that we are confident that something will happen,
but of course we are not one hundred percent certain. We think something is very
possible, but we also know that we can't be totally sure.
The opposite of likely is unlikely, and I think that this phrase, 'to be unlikely to', is used
more often, perhaps because people are rather pessimistic about the future. For example:

'I think it is unlikely that England will win the football World Cup.'
'I am unlikely to pass my exams this year.'

In these examples, the speaker is nearly certain that something won't happen.
Finally, I have talked about future events, but the phrase 'to be likely' or 'unlikely to' can
be used to refer to past and present time. You simply need to change the form of the verb
'to be'. For example:

'It was unlikely that Sarah knew that her boyfriend was a criminal when she
first met him.'

I hope that has answered your question. While you continue to study English, you are
likely to have other questions. If so, please write to us at BBC Learning English again for
help. Good luck.

About Gareth Rees

Gareth Rees has a BA (hons) in History and Philosophy of Science, CTEFLA, and
DELTA. He has taught EFL, EAP and Business English in China, Spain and England,
and he is the co-author of the Language Leader Elementary and Pre-Intermediate
English language course books (Pearson Longman). He currently teaches English in the
Language Centre at the University of the Arts, London.
Learning English

Dare and need - auxiliary verbs?

Christina Lamelas from Spain writes:


I have some doubts dealing with appropriate
use of the auxiliary particles do/does/did
with need and dare.
Sometimes I find need and dare used with
these auxiliaries and sometimes without
them, e.g.

You needn't come if you don't want


to.
You don't need to be genius to see
that it is wrong.
How dare you speak to me like that?
Don't you dare go in there.
I didn't dare answer. I daren't tell her.

Could you please explain to me the rules to


be followed?
Roger Woodham replies:

As you suggest, Christina, need can be used in two different


ways.

do not need to
On the one hand, it can be used as an ordinary verb and has the
same forms as an ordinary verb. The third person singular ends
with an s, and questions and negatives are formed with do. As an
ordinary verb, need is normally followed by an infinitive with to:

He needs to see a doctor. Do you need to see one too? ~


No, I don't need to see a doctor. But I need a good rest.

You don't need to be over 21 to go into a pub in Britain,


whereas in America you do.

In this sense, when we are talking about necessity, we generally


prefer need to / do not need to.

needn't
In the other format, need behaves as a modal verb, like can, could,
must should, etc. It has the same forms as modal auxiliary verbs:
the third person singular has no s, questions and negatives are
made without do. In this format, need is followed by an infinitive
without to:

You needn't bother to change the sheets. I'll sleep in them


later.
Need I lock the door when I leave? ~ No, you needn't.
Sarah will be home soon.

In this sense, we are talking more about obligation and giving


permission to someone not to do something. Note also that as a
modal verb it is most commonly used in negative sentences and
sometimes in questions.
In your examples, too, Christina, you are talking about obligation
on the one hand, and necessity on the other. Compare the
following alternatives to needn't and need to in the examples
below:

You needn't come if you don't want to.


Don't feel obliged to come if you don't want to.

You don't need to be a genius to see that it is wrong.


You don't have to be a genius to see that it is wrong.

doesn't dare to - daren't


Dare, meaning have the courage to do something, can also be
used in two ways:
* as an ordinary verb followed by an infinitive with to, with s in
the third person singular and with questions and negatives formed
with do

He never dares to criticise her for wasting money and she


doesn't dare to interrupt him when he's working.

* as a modal auxiliary verb followed by an infinitive without to,


with no third person singular s and with questions and negatives
without do:

Dare she tell him what she thinks about him? She daren't

say anything. He will only shout at her. "How dare you


speak to me like that?" he will say.
Differences in use are not as fixed or clear cut between doesn't
dare to and daren't as they are between doesn't need to and
needn't, except in expressions or collocations such as:
* How dare you? > How dare you walk away when I'm talking to
you?
* I dare you to I dare you to go up to him and ask him for a date.
* I dare say > I dare say you're pretty hungry after all that
cycling.
In this last example, I dare say means I suppose.
Occasionally you will find mixed modal/ordinary verb structures,
such as:

He didn't dare complain about the quality of the food.


Don't you dare! > Don't you dare throw that snowball at
me!

Note that dare, like other modals, is never used in progressive


form and need is not often used in progressive form:

I was driving as fast as I dared.


Are you driving into town today, Tom? Jack needs a lift.

Will you be needing any help with your homework?

Cynthia Lelos from Italy asks:


Non-standard English

I hear so many British saying I was sat waiting for


an hour or I was stood in the rain. Isn't that grammatically wrong? Shouldn't it be:
I was sitting..., I was standing...? I have even heard broadcasters on the BBC use
this seemingly incorrect form! Is there some verb tense I'm not aware of? Thanks.

Listen and download


Real
mp3 (1.2 MB)
Samantha answers:

Transcript (51 K)

So what a great question! I have to say, its rare for a nonnative speaker to notice this feature of spoken English, so you must have a very
good ear for conversations! The feature that youve drawn attention to is called a
non-standard grammatical form and in the cases youve mentioned the speakers
seem to combine two tenses into one new one.
So whats going on here? I was sat waiting for an hour uses the simple past of be and the
past participle of the second verb sit, and finally waiting is in the progressive verb form.
This pattern, which almost looks like the passive voice, is used to introduce anecdotes
and stories, almost as a kind of scene-setting device. It also sometimes suggests that the
person was forced to do something against their will, which is similar to the function of
the passive. This phrase is likely to be used when were complaining about something:
I was stood waiting for the bus for half an hour in the freezing cold.
I was finished cleaning when the kids come in and messed the room up again.
Technically, in writing, this combination of verb forms would be incorrect, and if children
wrote in this way at school, their teacher would correct the form of the second verb (as
youve done in your examples) or cross out the be participle to change the verb to the
simple past:
I sat waiting for an hour.
I stood in the rain.
The teacher corrects written English so that the child is aware of conventional or
standard usage, which a child needs to become literate. Even as children, were able to
modify our language depending on the formality of a situation and adult speakers who
use a lot of non-standard grammatical forms are probably unlikely to do so in formal
situations - for example, if they were asked to give a speech in public.
So, while a teacher might correct a childs written English, I think were more tolerant of
spoken variations, and these days, we use the term non-standard to describe such
features. I think its better than describing such variations as being wrong or incorrect,
because these non-standard grammatical patterns are used consistently by millions of

speakers every day! So, I really approve of your phrase seemingly incorrect, Cynthia, to
describe this usage, because I think that sums it up perfectly!
And Cynthia, I just want to finish by mentioning that there are some regional variations
in non-standard grammar. I thought Id tell you about some features of non-standard
grammar from the regional accent, Geordie, where I live. (In fact, rather than being an
accent, its a dialect, but thats another story!). OK

The first example Im going to tell you about is Ive went or Shes went or
Hes went home, which is used instead of gone.
Another example is the use of the simple present instead of the simple past
- I says to my husband - which uses the third person singular form of the
verb.
Theres also a non-standard conditional form used: If I hadve went
meaning If I had gone to express an unfulfilled condition.
Another example is that the past tense of irregular verbs becomes inflected:
I catched it; I telled him.
And finally, double negatives are common: You didnt want it, didnt you
not?

So, just before I go, or gan, you might be intrigued to learn that regional accents
(although not dialects) have become very fashionable in broadcasting, but the announcers
do read scripts written in standard English grammar! So good-bye and thank you for the
question Cynthia!

About Samantha
Samantha has been a teacher of English language and communication skills for
the past sixteen years. She taught in Japan for many years, but is now based at
Newcastle University, where she teaches on an MA in Translating and
Interpreting, as well as preparatory EFL programmes.
Learning English

'Get' and 'become'

Olga from Latvia asks:


Please tell me when we must use become and
when we must use get.
Margarete Stepaneke from Austria asks:
I would very much like to know when to use
become. My feeling is that verbs like get, turn,
go and grow are often preferred to become. Is

there a rule for when to use become?

Roger replies:

more questions

Get, as we shall see, has many different meanings whereas


become basically indicates development of some kind.
Get is more informal and is frequently used in speech; become
is more formal and is more often used in writing.
Get/become + adjective
When used with adjectives, get indicates growth or
development and can therefore be used as the preferred
alternative to become in an informal register. Compare the
following sentences:
Informal

Formal

I got interested in
I became interested in art in
photography when I was ten. later life.
As he got older, his garden
got really messy.

As he became older, he could no


longer maintain his garden

It got colder and colder the


further north we went.

It became increasingly cold as


we travelled north.

I'm getting quite hungry


now, aren't you?

He became quite angry when he


discovered there was no food

Become + noun
We cannot, however, use get with a noun, even though the
meaning is 'grow' or 'develop into'. We have to use become in
this sense:

'She was only seventeen when she became a beauty


queen.'

'Texas became the twenty-eighth state of the USA in


1845.

Get + noun/pronoun
When we use get with a noun or a pronoun as a direct object,
get usually means 'obtain', 'acquire', 'receive' or 'fetch'.
Become is impossible here:

'I got the highest marks in the class for my essay on


Lord Byron.'
'I got my goldfish from the pet shop down the road.'
'I was getting about fifty emails every day when I was
working on the project.'
'Could you get me a punnet of peaches from the
supermarket?'
'Let me get you a drink. What'll you have?'

Get and go to indicate movement


Get indicates the end of a journey and can be used informally as
an alternative to 'reach' or 'arrive at'. When we use go, we are
talking about the 'complete journey', usually. Compare the
following:

'I usually go to work by car, but I went to Bristol by train


yesterday.'
'I didn't get home until nearly midnight.'

'Can you tell me how to get to Buckingham Palace?'

Go, grow and turn to indicate a change of state


Grow indicates a slow change and sounds literary. It can be
replaced by become or get. Turn indicates a faster change and
can be replaced by go:

'As they grew richer, they invested more money in


shares.'
'My aim is to grow old gracefully and with dignity.'
'He drove away as soon as the lights turned green.'
'The leaves turned brown as the weather got colder.'

There is so much more to get to know about get, Margarete, but


I'll get into trouble with my editor if I make this reply any longer.
It is a difficult area, but I hope it is slowly becoming clearer.

Learn It

The passive with modals, future and infinitive forms


Gosia from Poland writes:
Could you explain to me how be is used in this sentence:
Sofia Coppola has become only the third woman to be
nominated for the best director at the Oscars.
I understand the meaning, but I have a problem with use.
When should I use be and when not? I meet this
construction in sentences very often.
Roger Woodham replies:
The passive with modals, future and infinitive forms
This is an example of a passive form. We use the passive when
it is not so important to know who the agent of the action is.
Here we are not so interested in knowing who nominated Sofia
Coppola for best director. Our attention is focused on the object,
the person who has been nominated. So instead of saying:
The American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has
nominated Sofia Coppola for best director.
we say:
Sofia Coppola has been nominated for best director.
Note that the object of an active verb becomes the subject of a
passive verb:
The People is published on Sundays
My curtains are being dry-cleaned
My passport has been stolen
The vase was sold for 5,000

With modals and with infinitive forms, the passive is formed


with be + past participle or have been + past participle. With
future forms it is constructed with be + past participle or being
+ past participle.
Future forms: will be / is going to be / is being / is to be +
past participle
The prisoner will be held indefinitely in a maximum security
jail.
He will never be released.
The Council House Tower Blocks in Manchester are to be
knocked down.
The tenants are being offered alternative accommodation.
The cinema in the High Street is going to be converted into a
dance hall.
Modals: can be / could be + past participle
We use these forms to talk about present and past ability or
possibility in the passive voice:
My professor has told me that I may be invited to give the
keynote speech at the conference this year.
The road over the mountains might be closed if this rain turns to
snow.
If you're all keen to make an early start, the meeting could be
brought forward to nine o' clock.
Modals: must be / ought to be / should be + past participle
We use these forms to talk about necessity and advisability in
the passive voice:
You can't expect her to work if she's not well. She must be
given time off.
You're not supposed to walk on that type of floor in high heels.
It shouldn't be allowed.

He ought to be rewarded for handing in all the money to the


police.
Modals: must've been / should've been / could've been + past
participle<
Note that when we are using modals to talk about most past
situations in the passive voice, be + past participle becomes have
been + past participle:
The car was clearly defective and should never have been
rented out.
That necklace is no longer in the shop window so it must have
been sold.
He insisted on playing American football wearing only a T-shirt
and shorts and could've been seriously injured.
Infinitives: to be / to have been + past participle
There is sometimes little difference in meaning whether be or
have been passive forms are used. On other occasions, be is
more clearly associated with present time and have been is more
clearly associated with past time:
Sofia Coppola is only the third woman to be nominated for best
director.
Sofia Coppola is only the third woman to have been nominated
for best director.
The prisoners are expected to be released today.
He is to be congratulated on passing his exam.
He was to have been rewarded for handing in the stolen goods
until it was discovered that he was involved with the criminal
gang.
Learn It

Short answers and question tags


Pascal Tanyimboh from Denmark writes:
My question is about agreeing with negative questions.
For example: You say, 'I won't be coming'. I answer,
'Won't you?'
Do you then say: yes (if you're not coming) or no (if
you're not coming)?
Roger Woodham replies:
Short questions and short answers
We normally answer with no if we are confirming negative
questions and yes if we are in agreement with affirmative
questions:
I'm not coming to the youth club tonight. ~ Aren't you? ~ No,
I'm not.
I won't be moving in with Jane after all. ~ Won't you? ~ No, I
won't.
I'm really enjoying myself here. ~ Are you? ~ Yes, I certainly
am.
I'll write to you as soon as I get there. ~ Will you? ~ Yes, I will. I
promise.
The purpose of short questions like these is to check the
accuracy of the information that has been given, perhaps
because we are surprised by it or have some doubts about it.
Note that we do not repeat all the information. The normal short
question/short answer pattern is typically auxiliary verb +
subject plus any additional words needed for emphasis:
I don't like any type of seafood. ~ Don't you? ~ No, I really
don't.
I wouldn't ever wear such short skirts. ~ Wouldn't you? ~ No, I

never would.
I'm going to sack all the staff and close the unit. ~ Are you
really? ~ Yes, I am.
Also note that contracted forms are normal in negative short
questions and answers, but cannot be used in the affirmative
where stressed, non-contracted forms are needed.
Expressing disbelief
Note that to express disbelief we sometimes use a longer
response and repeat everything we have heard. By using a rising
intonation at the end, we 'echo' the information back and turn it
into a question:
I'm going to sack all the staff and close the unit. ~ You're going
to sack all the staff and close the unit? ~ That's what I intend to
do, yes.
He broke his collarbone on purpose to get out of playing rugby.
~ He broke his collarbone on purpose to get out of playing
rugby? ~ That's what he did!
Question tags
We also often use question tags to check information or to
request agreement. With a positive statement we normally use a
negative question tag. With a negative statement, we always use
a positive tag.
If the main sentence contains an auxiliary verb or the nonauxiliary verb be, this is repeated in the question tag. If the main
sentence has no auxiliary, the question tag is formed with do or
did:
It's not very warm today, is it?
It's quite cold today, isn't it?
This beer hasn't been properly chilled, has it?
This beer's been out of the fridge too long, hasn't it?

She must've known the meeting had been postponed, mustn't


she?
You like Kevin a lot, don't you?
But you're not too keen on Brian, are you?
He used to play for Arsenal, didn't he?
But he never played for England, did he?

Replying to question tags


If you are confirming a positive statement, you say yes. If you
are disagreeing with a positive statement, you say no. In other
words, it is the main sentence that you are responding to, not so
much the tag:
She must've known the meeting had been postponed, mustn't
she? ~ Yes she must've. I wrote to her myself.
You've completed the assignments I gave you last week, haven't
you? ~ No, not yet. I'm sorry. I haven't.

Similarly, if you want to confirm a negative statement, you say


no and if you want to disagree with a negative statement, you
say yes.
You didn't know that Wendy married Brian after all, did you? ~
No, I didn't.
You didn't ever complete your MA, did you? ~ Yes, I did. I
completed it when I was in India.

Learning English

'to do' and 'to have done'

Two questions about the causitive


Juan Manuel Flores Garcia Rojas from
Mexico asks:
Can you explain to me about causative
sentences because I have difficulty in
understanding them.
Shariq Khan from Pakistan asks:
I want to ask if I can use the causative in the
past perfect tense. Is this a correct sentence:
Had you had your car repaired?

more
questions

Roger replies:

We use the 'have something done' construction when we want


to indicate that we have arranged for other people to do
something for us. Compare the following sentences:
'He repaired the fence.' (He did the work himself.)
'He had the fence repaired.' (He arranged for somebody
else to do it.)
'Are you going to redecorate the house yourself?' 'No,
Im going to have it redecorated.'
Take care with the formation of the causative. The past
participle always comes after the object, thus:
have + object + past participle

Look at these examples:


'The family had their portraits painted by a professional
artist.'
'Weve just had double-glazing fitted and the house is so
much warmer now.'
'Its not surprising that you break down all the time, you
never have your car serviced.'
'When are you going to have your bad tooth taken out?'
'Joanna loves having her photograph taken, but David
hates it.'

As you can see from the above illustrations, Sharik, the


causative can be used with a wide variety of different tenses and
constructions, e.g. past simple, present perfect, present simple,
future reference, 'like/dislike/love/hate' + -ing and so on.
However, I dont think it would be used so often with the past
perfect, although the example given below sounds quite natural:

'By the time my mother arrived I had had my ears


pierced and there was nothing she could do about it.'

In informal, spoken English, we also sometimes use the


alternative 'get something done' instead of 'have something
done':
'When are you going to get your hair cut?'
'If you dont get the roof repaired before winter, youll
be in serious trouble.
Note also that the causative construction is sometimes used as
an alternative to the passive voice. Compare the following:
'He had his car serviced regularly so it never broke
down.'

'His car was serviced regularly so it never broke down.'

Learning English

Lots to do with 'do'

M Pedroso from Brazil asks:


M. Pedroso from Brazil asks: Why is the auxiliary
verb do used in affirmative sentences like this: I
do believe in some things?

Roger replies:

more
questions

You are quite right in suggesting that do is used as an auxiliary


verb in questions and negative sentences, like these:
'Do you like sugar in tea and coffee?'
'Did you see Mary last night?'
'What did she tell you?'
'Did you do your homework?'
'I like sugar in coffee but I dont like sugar in tea.'
'I didnt do all my homework.'
'I didnt see Mary.'

' I didnt even phone her so she didnt tell me anything.'

Strong emphasis
You are also quite right in suggesting that do is not normally
used in affirmative sentences. However, it is used when we want
to place strong emphasis on what we are saying to show that we
feel strongly about it in a positive way. In all these cases, do is
pronounced with strong stress. Consider the following:

'I do like sugar in my coffee! Loads of it!'


'He does look smart in his new suit.'
'You may not realise it, but I do love you.'

'I did enjoy Sues cooking last night. What a delicious


meal she served us!

Contrastive emphasis
There are three other circumstances when do is used in
affirmative sentences or clauses.
It is used for contrastive emphasis when we want to contrast
one set of circumstances or point in time with another. Study the
following:

'I wish I could lose some weight.' 'Yes, well you do eat
rather a lot of sweet things.'
'Why didnt you ask him for a loan?' 'I did ask him, but
he said he had no money.'
'I hardly ever see my ex-wife, but I do see my children
every week.

Polite Imperatives
It is sometimes used with imperatives when we want to make a
suggestion or invitation more polite or welcoming. Study the
following:

'Do have some more strawberries! Help yourself!'


'Do come in! Do sit down!'
'Do be careful on holiday! Dont take any risks!'

'Do write and tell us how youre getting on!

Avoiding repetition
It is often used when we want to avoid repeating a verb which
we have already used in the first part of the sentence. Consider
the following:

'Can I have another go with your game boy?' 'Yes, do!'


'She said shed help me with the ironing and she did!'

'Did you see Maria when she was over in London?' 'Yes, I
did!'

Learning English

'used to'

Paul from Russia asks:


Would you answer my grammar question? In
which cases should we use simple past and in
which cases used to do?

Roger replies:

more
questions

In my experience, Paul, many students have difficulty with the


correct usage of used to, so it may be useful to spend a little
time looking at this.

It refers to past habits and states. If we say that somebody used


to do something, we mean that some time ago he was in the
habit of doing this, but he no longer does it now. Here are some
examples:
'I used to smoke 30 cigarettes a day, but I gave up when
I became convinced that smoking causes cancer.'
'I didn't use to like cricket, but now I'm getting
interested in it.'

'Didn't he use to be vegetarian?' 'Yes, he did, but he


started eating meat last winter and now he's a real
carnivore.'

Past simple, on the other hand, describes something which


happened at a definite point in time in the past. Thus:
'I bought one of Lady Di's dresses at an auction in
Boston.'

'When did you meet your husband?' 'I met him in 1992,
but we didn't get married until quite recently.'

Learning English

Present perfect: simple and continuous

J. Schockaert from Belgium asks:


Could you please tell me:
when to use a present perfect and a
present perfect continuous or
progressive?

how to teach the formation and use of the


English tenses in a simple way?

Roger replies:

more
questions

present perfect simple


Both the present perfect simple and the present perfect

continuous relate a past action to the present, but the present


perfect simple suggests a completed action and focuses more
on achievements and results. Consider the following:

'Ive completed my English and geography homework,


but I havent started my maths assignment yet.'
'Shes travelled to many countries, but shes never
been outside Europe.'
'Have you ever tried Japanese food?' 'No, never. Whats
it like?'

Note that the present perfect is often used in conjunction with


adverbs such as: 'ever', 'never', 'already', 'just', ''still', 'yet':
'Do you want me to clean the kitchen this afternoon?'
'No thanks, Ive already done it.'

'Ive just fed the baby but she seems to be hungry


again.'

present perfect continuous


When we use the present perfect continuous, however, there
is usually a suggestion that the activity is not yet completed, or
we wish to emphasise the length of time it has lasted or stress
the continuous, on-going nature of the activity. The present
perfect continuous is often used in conjunction with for or since
phrases. Consider the following:

'How long have you been waiting for this bus?' 'Ive
been standing here for over half an hour. These buses
never come.'
'Ive been looking for a summer holiday job for two
weeks now, but I still havent found one.'
'Weve been living here in Brighton since 1988 the
year we got married.'

present perfect continuous vs present perfect simple


Whether teaching or learning the present perfect, it is often
useful to present the two verb aspects in a contrastive way.
Compare the following:

'Dick Francis has been writing novels since 1957. In


forty odd years, he has written over 30 best sellers.'
'Ive read five chapters of this book this afternoon. (And
I think thats quite an achievement).'

'Ive been reading this book all afternoon. (And I still


havent finished it yet.)'
'Whos eaten my chocolates? There are none left.'
'Whos been eating my chocolates? There are only a few
left.

present perfect vs past verb forms


Whether teaching or learning the present perfect, it may also be
useful to compare it with past forms where the focus of attention
is on a point or period in the past.

'I first went to the States in 1995. That was where I met
Peter. So weve known each other for six years and
weve been married now for three years.'
'That man has been standing outside our house since
early morning. He arrived at eight o clock and hasnt
moved all day.'
'When I woke up the sun was shining, but its been
raining steadily since eleven o clock and its now half
past three.'

Learning or teaching the form of the present perfect isnt too


complicated, as long as you remember that it is constructed like
this:
present perfect continuous: has ('s) / have ('ve) + been +
ing
present perfect simple: has ('s) / have ('ve) + past participle
If the contracted forms present the greatest difficulty, it will be
necessary to give as much practice as possible to: 'Ive'
'Weve' 'Youve' 'Theyve' in contrast to: 'Hes' 'Shes'
'Its...'

Learning English

Present perfect and past simple

Bahito from Algeria asks:


Could you please explain to me the exact
difference between the uses of the present
perfect and past simple tenses, especially
when asking questions?

Roger replies:

more
questions

We use the present perfect when we are considering something


that started in the past and which we want to connect with the
present.
It may be something that started in the recent past, or it may
have started a long time ago. Look at the following examples:

'I've lived in this small village all my life.' (i.e. up to the


present and probably into the future too.)
'I haven't yet visited the capital city and I've only been
to the provincial capital once.' (i.e. in my entire life)
'But I've just passed my driving test and I've bought a
new car (both in the very recent past) and I intend to
travel soon.'

In the affirmative, we often use the prepositions for or since


with a time phrase and the adverbs just and already.
In the negative we often combine the present perfect with the
adverbs never and yet. Look at the way they are used in the
following and the preceding examples.

'She's worked as a doctor for the last twenty five years


and has never been ill herself.'
'I've known Tom's sister since we were at school
together.'
'You've already cleaned the house and prepared lunch
and it's only eleven o'clock. Slow down!

Present perfect: interrogative


When we want to ask questions using the present perfect, we
often use the adverbs ever and yet or use the How long...?

construction.
For the interrogative, we must also remember to invert subject
and verb. Study the following:

'Have you ever tried to swim in the North Sea?' 'No I


never have. It's far too rough.'
li> 'Has the doctor called yet to see mother?' 'Yes, he's
just been.'

'Have you finished your homework?' 'No, not yet. I still


have maths to do.'
'How long have you had that coat?' 'Oh, for about two
years now. It's not new.'
'How long have you been in Britain?' 'I've been here for
two weeks already.

Past simple: affirmative and negative


We use the past simple when we want to refer to actions which
were completed in the past. It is used with a wide variety of past
time phrases or expressions in reply to the question When.?,
such as; earlier this morning, yesterday, last week, from
April until June last year, in 1999, during the war,
between 1985 and 1988, before we got married.
The negative is formed with the auxiliary verb didn't. Study the
following examples:

'I saw Henry at the meeting this morning, but I didn't


see Sue.'
'I bought a lot of language books when I was in London
last week.'
'Over fifteen million people emigrated to the United
States during the 19th century.'
'I didn't have time to finish the article before I left for
work.

Notice that in the past participle in the present perfect, and in


the affirmative in the past simple, regular verbs end in -ed, but
notice also how many common irregular verbs there are in the
above examples. The past simple is the standard tense used to
describe actions which follow each other when telling a story. But
in the following example notice how the present perfect is used:
'I came home late last night. Fred was in the kitchen but
he didn't say anything. He just looked at me as if to say:

'I know where you have been.' We ate our supper in


silence and then we went to bed.'

Past simple: interrogative


In the interrogative, we must always remember to use the
auxiliary verb did with normal inversion. It is always associated
with the When...? question and may be used with a wide variety
of other question forms too. Study the following examples:
It is early evening in Henry's home in the country.
Henry:

Hello Sheila. I didn't expect to see you here.

Sheila:

Oh, I've been here for quite a while.

Henry:

When did you arrive?

Sheila:

Just after lunch.

Henry:

Did Patrick pick you up from the station?

Sheila:

No, it was a nice day so I walked.

Henry:

Have you eaten anything since you've been here?

Sheila:

Yes, I had afternoon tea with the girls.

Henry:

What did you think of Penny?

Sheila:

She's grown up a lot since I last saw her.

Henry:

And how did you find Rebecca?

Sheila:

She didn't join us. I haven't seen her yet.

Now see if you can write a dialogue combining the past simple
and present perfect.

Learning English

the subjunctive

Olly Jezek from the Czech Republic writes:


Please could you explain how to use the
subjunctive? E.g.: Its important that the lesson
be funny. When should we use be and why?
Maria Goranova from the Czech Republic
asks: What is the use of the present subjunctive
in modern English? Why is it possible to, and
when is it possible, to ignore the subjunctive and
use present simple or past simple instead? E.g.:
Why is it so important that he goes there?
instead of Why is it so important that he
(should) go there? Also, what is the correct
construction to be used in the so-called that
clause?
Sarai from Mexico writes: Could you please tell
me how to use the verb recommend?
Roger replies:

more
questions

The subjunctive is used to express intention or proposal about


the future. It requires use of the verb in its basic form rather
than its normal tense form.
We dont use the subjunctive very much in contemporary
English unless we wish to sound very formal. With verbs like
suggest, recommend, insist and adjectives like important,
essential, imperative, crucial, vital, we often use should +
infinitive instead of the subjunctive or we can use the normal
tense form. The reporting verbs and adjectives above are
normally followed by a that-clause in which that itself is often
omitted.
In your example, Olly, Its important that the lesson be funny
sounds too formal.
We would normally say: Its important that the lesson should
be funny.
Compare also the following:
The doctor recommended (that) he should give up
smoking.
The doctor recommended (that) he give up smoking.
(More formal)

The doctor recommended (that) he gives up smoking.


(Less formal)

It + be + adjective:
desirable/important/essential/imperative/vital/etc
In all of these examples below with should, you can substitute
the subjunctive if you want to make it sound more formal or the
present simple tense if you want it to be less formal:
It is essential (that) you should be given your
medication by a properly qualified nurse. (Or: be given,
or are given.)
For the future well-being of the company, it is imperative
(that) he should resign now. (Or: resign, or resigns.)
It is desirable (that) he should be retained in custody,
rather than released on bail. (Or: be retained, or is
retained.)

It is vital (that) he should receive some treatment (or


receive, or receives) whether he be (or is) innocent or
guilty of this particular crime.

suggest/recommend/insist/demand
Similarly with these reporting verbs, we can use should, the
subjunctive or the normal tense in the that-clause, depending on
whether it is appropriate to sound formal or not:
The government tried to insist (that) all firearms should
be handed in without delay. (Or: be handed in, or are
handed in.)
The doctors have recommended (that) he should remain
in hospital for a further three weeks. (Or: remain, or
remains.)

I suggested he should leave right now. (Or: leave, or


leaves.)

advise/ask/command/instruct/request/require/warn
Note that these reporting verbs do not require should or a thatclause and are normally used instead with a simple infinitive.
The issue of whether to use the subjunctive or not with these
verbs does not then arise.
Consider the following:
Her mother advised them to be home by ten o clock.
They required me to clean the house every Saturday.
You asked me to let you know how much it would cost.

I warned him not to swim where there were dangerous

currents.

Were is also a kind of subjunctive when it is used with I and


he/she/it instead of was with wish and in if-clauses.
If we use the more natural was, it will sound more informal.
Consider the following:
I wish I were (or was) home now.
I wish it were (or was) the weekend.
If I were (or was) you, Id get in touch with Veronika
before she leaves for Australia

If I were (or was) still living with John, Id be much


better off, but I wouldnt be so independent.

fixed expressions with the subjunctive


There are a number of fixed expressions which require the
subjunctive, including:
Bless you. (Which means: May God bless you.)
Long live our gracious Queen. (The first line of the
British National Anthem)
A toast now: long live the bride and groom.

I have always supported you financially, but be that as it


may, I can no longer support your current lifestyle.
If I have to pretend that you no longer exist, so be it.
Be that as it may means whether that is the case or
not So be it means nothing can or will be done to
change that .

Learning English

Just, already, ever, yet, since and for with


present perfect

Vania Oliveira from Brazil writes:


If I speak without using the present
perfect, can I still have a good conversation
with someone in English? I find the present
perfect so difficult and sometimes I can't
understand it. Can I avoid it?

Roger Woodham replies:

It is not easy to communicate with someone without using the


present perfect. We often need to talk about things which
happened or started to happen in the past and which are linked
to the present or future. The present perfect is the tense that
we need in order to do this.
It may help you to fix it in your mind and start to use it if you
note that it is often used with the adverbs just, already, ever
and yet and with time phrases with for and since.
Present perfect with just /already
Just often emphasises the idea of close to the present, so it is
often used with the present perfect. Already suggests that
something has happened sooner than expected and again is
linked with present time and therefore the present perfect:

Do you want me to make the salad for supper tonight?


~ I've already made it. It's on the table.

I've just spoken to Jane. She's not going to join us for


supper tonight.

Present perfect with yet / ever / never / always


These indefinite time adverbs suggest at any time up till now,
so they are ideally suited for use with the present perfect:

Have you ever driven a car with manual drive? ~ No, I


never have. I've always driven cars with automatic
drive. ~ It's not too difficult. You'll soon get used to it.

I don't think you've met Rachel yet, have you? ~ No,


I haven't. I've met a lot of your friends from work, but
I've not met Rachel yet. ~ She's absolutely lovely. I'm
sure you'll like her.

Notice how in all these examples, use of the present perfect is


linked to the future as well as the present. Note also that the
perfect tense in negative sentences has two possible forms: I've
not OR I haven't, you've not OR you haven't, (s)he's not
OR (s)he hasn't, we've not OR we haven't, they've not OR
they haven't.

Present perfect with no indefinite time adverb


Note that we often use the present perfect with no indefinite
time adverb, even though we are thinking of a period of time up
to the present. In the following examples, yet is understood but
not used:

Have you been to see the latest Spielberg film,


Minority Report? It's fantastic!

Has anybody seen Brenda? She's supposed to be at


work today.

Present perfect with since / for


We use for when we want to measure duration - when we want
to say how long something lasts. If we want to measure
duration up to the present, we therefore use it with the present
perfect. Since tells about the starting time of the action and
how it has continued up to the present time. It is therefore
often used with the present perfect:

I've only been on this diet for a couple of weeks, but


I've already lost half a kilo.

We've lived in this house for over twenty years ever since July 1981 to be precise.
They've known Jennifer since she was two years old.

Nobody's seen her since 11 April - the day on which


she walked out of the flat.

Present perfect progressive with since / for


Since and for are very often used with the present perfect
progressive as this tense enables us to emphasise the on-going
nature of the activity:

How long have you been working for that software


company? ~ I've been working for them for two
years now.

I'm out of work. Didn't you know? I've been looking


for a job since last Christmas, but I can't seem to find
anything.

Note that with verbs which describe a state rather than an


action, verbs such as agree, consider, feel, find, know, like,
love, prefer, the progressive form is not normally used,
even if the meaning emphasises the continuous, on-going

aspect:

I've agreed to lend her my car whenever she's in


England.

We've known her family ever since we were


neighbours in Frankfurt.

I've always loved her and always will.


But I've felt for some time now that she doesn't love
me.

Learning English

Ever, yet and in with time expressions

Margot from France writes:


Which tenses do you use with ever? Is it
always the present perfect: Have you ever
driven a car? or can it be present perfect
+ -ing: Have you ever been surfing? Are
these sentences correct?
Bea from Hungary writes:
What tenses should I use in the following
example: A lot of supermarkets were
built in the last 10 years and a lot more
will be built later. Are these tenses correct
at all?
Roger Woodham replies:

Ever - at any time up to the present


Ever, as an indefinite time adverb, means at any time. When
it is used with the present perfect or present perfect
continuous, it means at any time up to the present. This is
a very common usage and your examples of use are absolutely

fine, Margot. Compare also the following:

Have you ever seen the Queen in person? ~ No, I never


have.
Have your ever grown vegetables in your garden? ~ I
did a few years ago, but not recently.

ever - at any time in a period in the past


We can also use ever to enquire about a particular period in
the past and this usage, while less common, requires the past
simple:

When you were living in Egypt, did you ever see a Nile
crocodile? ~ No, I don't ever remember seeing a
crocodile in the Nile!

Did you ever sail up the Nile? ~ Once, but only from
Luxor to Aswan.

ever - at any time in the future


Note that ever is also often used with going to and will future
forms when predicting the future:

Is he ever going to give up gambling and live a normal


life? ~ No, I don't think he ever will. ~ Do you think
they'll ever get married? ~ I don't think they'll ever
have enough money.

Yet and already


Note that yet, meaning up till now, and already, meaning
earlier than expected, are also indefinite time adverbs like
ever and are associated particularly with the present perfect
tense and the verb be. Like ever, yet is used mainly in
interrogative and negative sentences:

Is the mail here yet? ~ No the postman hasn't come


yet.
Are you going to stay? ~ I don't know yet. No decision
has yet been made.
Have the children returned yet? ~ Susan's already here,
but Simon hasn't come back yet
He's already earned enough money to retire on and he's
only thirty five.
It's already nine thirty and I'm already late for my

appointment.
in the last ten years / six months / three weeks / few
days
These adverbial expressions indicate a fixed period of
time, and say when something happened. They connect the
past with the present and, like ever, since and for are most
commonly used with the present perfect. Your supermarket
example therefore sounds best with the present perfect
passive, Bea, rather than past simple passive:

In the last ten years, since 1993, a lot of supermarkets


have been built on the outskirts of towns and in the next
five years many more will be.

He's on hunger strike and hasn't eaten anything in the


last three weeks. For three weeks now, he's eaten
nothing at all
I haven't spoken to Roger for months / in months. He
must be out of the country.

In the last few days I've tidied my study and thoroughly


cleaned the house.

Learning English

suppose and supposed to

Sanmati Pragya from India writes:


Hi! Im an Indian citizen living in America.
Here people use suppose and supposed to
a lot of the time in conversation. Can you
please tell me in which sense and where they
should be used?
Roger Woodham replies:

Suppose and supposed to are used very frequently in British


English too. We shall see that suppose has a number of
different meanings and uses and that supposed to is different
again from suppose.

suppose = think/believe/imagine/expect
In this sense, suppose is often used in requests with negative
structures when we hope the answer will be positive:

I dont suppose you could lend me your dinner jacket,


could you? ~ Sure! When do you need it?
I suppose its too late to see the doctor now, isnt it? ~
Hold on. Let me see if I can fit you in.
I dont suppose I could see the doctor now, could I?~ I
can fit you in at 11.30. Can you wait till then?

It is also used in short answers with the same meaning of


think/believe/imagine/expect. Note that two forms of the
negative are possible here:

Will Jeremy be at Peters this evening? ~ I dont


think/suppose/imagine/expect so.
Will you try to see Jennifer when you get back? ~ I
think/suppose/imagine/expect not.
Would you be prepared to stay on for an extra week? ~ I
suppose/expect/guess so.

Note that suppose here describes a mental or emotional state,


and it is not normally used in the continuous form.

Suppose/supposing = what if?


Suppose or supposing can also be used in a quite different
way instead of What if? to introduce suggestions or to
express fears. Compare the following and note that the verb that
follows suppose or supposing can be in either present of past
tense form:

We havent got strawberry jam for the filling, so suppose


/ supposing we use(d) raspberry jam, would that be all
right?
Suppose / Supposing I come / came next Thursday
rather than Wednesday, will / would that be all right?
Will these shoes will be OK for tennis? ~ I dont think so.
Suppose / Supposing the court is wet and you
slip(ped)?

be supposed to + infinitive = should


Supposed to in this sense means that something should be
done because it is the law, the rule or the custom. However, in
practice it is often not done:

Im supposed to tidy my room before I go to bed at


night, but I always tidy it when I get up in the morning
instead.
In Germany youre not supposed to walk on the grass in
the parks, but in England you can.
Im supposed to return these books by Friday, but Im
not sure whether I can.

In the past tense, it is used to mean that something was


planned or intended to happen, but did not happen. Note that in
these examples, we can use should have as an alternative to
was supposed to:

I was supposed to go to Cuba for a conference last year


but then I got ill and couldnt go.
Wasnt Tom supposed to be here for lunch? I wonder
whats happened to him!
I should have gone to Cuba for a conference last year
but then I got ill and couldnt go.

Shouldnt Tom have been here for lunch? I wonder


whats happened to him!
supposed to be = generally believed to be
Finally, we can use supposed to be in this sense:

This stuffs supposed to be good for stomach cramps.


Why dont you try it?
The castle was supposed to be haunted, but I had a
good nights sleep there nevertheless!

When you are practising these examples in speech, note that the
final d in supposed to is not pronounced. It is pronounced as
'suppose to', but should always be written in its correct form
grammatically as supposed to.

If you want to practise using some of these phrases look at our


Message Board in the You, Me and Us part of our website.

You might also like