Week 5 English II Graded Assignment

The most appropriate modal verb to complete the sentence “Preetham has been returning late every evening. He really ____ speak to his boss about leaving a little earlier” is Ought to ✅.

Here’s why:

• Ought to is used to express a strong recommendation or what is advisable, similar to “should”. The sources indicate that “should” conveys “requirements of appropriate behavior in the form of advice or suggestion”. Although “ought to” is not extensively defined in the provided sources, its usage in Source (“not as good as it ought to be”) implies a sense of what is proper or expected, aligning perfectly with giving advice. In this context, Preetham “really ought to” speak to his boss, meaning it’s a very good and necessary thing for him to do given his situation.
• Can expresses ability, general possibility, or informal permission. While Preetham can speak to his boss (he has the ability), this modal verb doesn’t convey the sense of recommendation implied by “He really…”.
• Might denotes a weaker or remote possibility. Saying Preetham “really might” speak to his boss would imply uncertainty about whether he will, rather than a strong suggestion that he should.
• Will is primarily used for future actions or expressing certainty/prediction. Using “will” here would mean that Preetham definitely will speak to his boss, not that he should or ought to.

Therefore, “ought to” best fits the meaning of a strong suggestion or advisable action for Preetham’s situation.

In the sentence “This might be your can of water,” the modal auxiliary is Might ✅.

Here’s a breakdown of why, based on the provided sources:

• What is a Modal Auxiliary?

  • A modal verb (also called a modal auxiliary) is a type of verb that indicates “modality,” such as “likelihood, ability, request, capacity, suggestion, order, obligation or advice”.
  • Unlike “tense auxiliaries” (like ‘is’, ‘are’, ‘am’, ‘was’, ‘were’ which indicate tense), modal auxiliaries do not indicate any tense themselves; they are “non-tensed auxiliaries”.

• Why ‘Might’ is the Modal Auxiliary:

  • ‘Might’ is explicitly listed as one of the primary modal verbs.
  • In the given sentence, “This might be your can of water,” ‘might’ is used to express possibility. It specifically conveys a “weaker possibility” or “remote possibility”, suggesting that it is possible, but not certain, that the can of water belongs to the person.
  • Modal auxiliaries typically precede the base form of another verb, which ‘be’ is in this sentence.

• Why the Other Options are Incorrect:

  • Can: While “Can” is indeed a modal auxiliary verb, used to express ability or general possibility, it is not present in the given sentence.
  • Be: Forms of the verb “to be” (like ‘is’, ‘are’, ‘am’, ‘was’, ‘were’) are classified as “tense auxiliaries” because they indicate tense. The sources clarify that these “are not verbs” in the sense of being main verbs expressing action, but rather elements that “host this information on the verb” and carry tense marking. In the sentence, ‘be’ follows the modal ‘might’ as the main verb, but it is not the modal auxiliary itself.
  • Your: This word is a possessive determiner (or possessive adjective), indicating ownership. It is not a verb or any type of auxiliary.

In the sentence “She could be here tomorrow,” the modal auxiliary is Could ✅.

Here’s why:

• Modal Auxiliary Definition: A modal verb (also known as a modal auxiliary) is a type of verb used to indicate “modality,” such as “likelihood, ability, request, capacity, suggestion, order, obligation or advice”. Critically, modal auxiliaries do not indicate any tense themselves.
• Identifying ‘Could’:
  • “Could” is explicitly listed as one of the “primary modal verbs” or “modal auxiliaries”.
  • In this sentence, “She could be here tomorrow,” ‘could’ is used to express possibility. It suggests that it is possible she will be here tomorrow.
  • Modal auxiliaries are non-tensed auxiliaries, meaning they don’t change form to show past or present tense. ‘Could’ fits this description.
• Why other options are incorrect:
  • Be: While ‘be’ is an auxiliary, it is classified as a “tense auxiliary” because it “indicate[s] tense” (e.g., ‘is’, ‘are’, ‘am’, ‘was’, ‘were’). In this sentence, ‘be’ is the base form of the main verb following the modal ‘could’, but it is not the modal auxiliary itself.
  • Here: This word indicates a place or location and functions as an adverb of place. It is not a verb or an auxiliary.

The statement “The modal auxiliary ‘may’ denotes number, person, and gender” is False ❌.

Here’s why, based on the provided sources:

• Modal Auxiliaries Do Not Indicate Tense, Number, or Person: The sources explicitly state that modal auxiliaries (also called modal verbs) are “non-tensed auxiliaries”. Unlike tense auxiliaries (such as ‘is’, ‘are’, ‘am’, ‘was’, ‘were’, which indicate tense, singular/plural, and person), modal auxiliaries do not indicate any tense. Crucially, they “do not have any number and person distinction”. This means they do not change form depending on the subject’s number (singular/plural) or person (first, second, third). For example, you say “I may,” “he may,” “they may”—the form of ‘may’ does not change. They are described as “non-inflational” meaning they “cannot add Ing, we cannot add e s, we cannot add anything to this auxiliary”.
• ‘May’ is a Modal Auxiliary: ‘May’ is specifically listed as one of the primary modal verbs. Therefore, the general rules for modal auxiliaries apply to ‘may’.
• Gender and Agreement: While agreement features like “person” and “number” are discussed in relation to verbs, “gender” is noted as participating “in a very limited way” in English agreement, and primarily in relation to nouns, not verbs or auxiliaries. Modal auxiliaries are certainly not involved in denoting gender.

In summary, ‘may’, as a modal auxiliary, expresses concepts like possibility or permission, but it does not denote or change for number, person, or gender.

In the sentence “Could you shut the door?”, the modal auxiliary ‘could’ denotes Request ✅.

Here’s why, drawing upon the provided sources:

• ‘Could’ for Requests: The sources explicitly state that “We use Can you … ? or Could you … ? when we ask people to do things”. An example provided is “Could you open the door, please?”. This directly aligns with “Could you shut the door?”.
• Politeness: When making requests, “you can use, or you could use both can and could”. The use of ‘could’ in requests often implies a greater degree of politeness than ‘can’, especially in more formal situations.
• Distinction from other uses:
  • While ‘could’ can denote possibility (e.g., “The bus could be late”, “he could be busy”), this meaning does not apply when asking someone to perform an action like shutting a door.
  • ‘Could’ can refer to ability in the past (e.g., “When I was young, I could run very fast”), but this is not its function in the given sentence.
  • ‘Could’ is also used for suggestions (e.g., “We could try Thai food this time”). While a request can be seen as a form of suggestion, the specific phrasing “Could you…?” for an action directly implies a request rather than a general idea for consideration.
  • ‘Could I…?’ is used for permission (e.g., “Could I borrow your umbrella?”, “Could I use your laptop to send an email?”). However, “Could you shut the door?” is not asking for permission for the speaker to do something, but rather requesting the listener to perform an action.

Therefore, in the context of “Could you shut the door?”, ‘could’ is used to make a polite request.

In the sentence “Can you do everything on your own?”, the modal auxiliary ‘Can’ denotes Ability ✅.

Here’s a detailed explanation:

• A modal verb, also known as a modal auxiliary, is a type of verb that is used to indicate “modality,” such as “likelihood, ability, request, capacity, suggestion, order, obligation or advice”.
• The sources explicitly state that ‘can’ is used to express ability in its present form. For instance, “I can play the piano” or “Sarah can speak Italian” signifies the speaker’s or subject’s capability. Similarly, “I can run three kilometres without a break when I was a kid” indicates past ability. The sentence “Can you do everything on your own?” directly questions the listener’s capacity or skill to perform all tasks independently.
• While ‘can’ can also be used for:
  • General Possibility: This refers to what is generally possible in the world, like “living in New York can cost a fortune”. However, in “Can you do everything on your own?”, it is not a general statement but an inquiry about a specific person’s capacity.
  • Requests: “Can you…?” is commonly used for making requests, such as “Can you pass me the salt, please?”. In such cases, the speaker is asking the listener to perform an action for the speaker’s benefit or a shared purpose. In contrast, “Can you do everything on your own?” is not a request for the listener to perform an action for the speaker, but rather an inquiry into the listener’s self-sufficiency or capacity.
  • Permission: “Can I…?” or “Could I…?” are used to ask for permission, like “Can I sit here?” or “May I ask a question?”. The given sentence does not involve the speaker asking for permission.

Therefore, given the context of “do everything on your own,” the primary meaning conveyed by ‘can’ is the ability of the person to handle tasks independently.

In the sentence “It could be a happy accident,” the modal auxiliary ‘could’ denotes Possibility ✅.

Here’s a detailed explanation, drawing on the provided sources:

• Modal Auxiliary Function: Modal verbs, also known as modal auxiliaries, are used to indicate “modality” such as “likelihood, ability, request, capacity, suggestion, order, obligation or advice”. They do not indicate tense themselves.
• ‘Could’ for Possibility: The sources repeatedly highlight that ‘could’ is extensively used to express possibility.
  • Specifically, when discussing possibilities, “could is used more often than can”. For example, the statement “the bus could be late” signifies “making a guess of the current situation, saying what is possible”. Another example provided is “My boss is not responding to my emails; he could be busy,” which also refers to “a possible situation”.
  • In the given sentence, “It could be a happy accident,” the speaker is conveying a likelihood or chance that something is indeed a “happy accident.” This aligns perfectly with the definition of ‘could’ expressing a possibility or a guess about a situation.
  • While ‘can’ can express “general possibilities” (e.g., “living in New York can cost a fortune”), ‘could’ is used in “every other context when we talk about possibility”. The scenario of something being a “happy accident” is a specific possibility, not a general truth, thus fitting the use of ‘could’.
• Why other options are incorrect:
  • Ability: While ‘could’ can denote ability, this use typically refers to past ability (e.g., “I could run a few kilometres without any break when I was a kid”). In “It could be a happy accident,” ‘could’ is not describing someone’s capacity to perform an action.
  • Suggestion: ‘Could’ is used for making suggestions (e.g., “We could try Thai food this time”). However, “It could be a happy accident” is not proposing an action for consideration; it’s an assessment of a situation.
  • Request: ‘Could’ is also used for making requests (e.g., “Could you pass me the salt, please?”). The sentence is not asking someone to do something.

Therefore, in the context of the sentence, ‘could’ serves to indicate the possibility of something being a happy accident.

In the sentence “Would you join us, please?”, the appropriate modal auxiliary for a formal context is Would ✅.

The sources indicate that in formal situations, it is better to use ‘would’ to form requests and proposals. For example, “Would you please come in?” is given as an example of a formal request. In contrast, ‘will’ is used for informal requests.

The use of would is preferred in reported speech.

When you are reporting somebody’s speech, you should definitely use ‘would’ and not ‘will’. An example provided is: “She told me that she would be here at 8 o’clock”. Attempting to replace ‘would’ with ‘will’ in such a context, like “When I was young, I will play tennis with my brother,” sounds grammatically wrong.

In the sentence “My friend is not picking up the call. She _______ be busy,” the most appropriate modal auxiliary is Could ✅.

Here’s why:

• Expressing Possibility: The primary function of ‘could’ in this context is to express a possibility or make a guess about a current situation. The sources state that when talking about possibilities, ‘could’ is used more often than ‘can’. For instance, if your boss isn’t responding to emails, you might say “he could be busy” to indicate a possible situation.
• ‘Could’ vs. ‘Would’ for Possibility: It is explicitly stated that when you are talking about a possibility, you should definitely use ‘could’ and not ‘would’. While ‘would’ can be used for “uncertain things” when giving an opinion, it is not the preferred modal for general possibilities or guesses about a current situation, as ‘could’ is.

Therefore, to convey the possibility that your friend is busy because they are not picking up the phone, ‘could’ is the correct choice.