What are auxiliary modal verbs??

please answer this question....its urgent

  • -3

how my question is wrong?

  • -2

what do you mean?

  • -2
Modal auxiliarymeaning contributionExample
can1deontic/dynamic modalityShe can really sing.
can2epistemic modalityThat can indeed help.
could1deontic modalityHe could swim when he was young.
could2epistemic modalityThat could happen soon.
may1deontic modalityMay I stay?
may2epistemic modalityThat may be a problem.
mightepistemic modalityThe weather might improve.
must1deontic modalitySam must go to school.
must2epistemic modalityIt must be hot outside.
shalldeontic modalityYou shall not pass.
should1deontic modalityYou should stop that.
should2epistemic modalityThat should be suprising.
willepistemic modalityShe will try to lie.
wouldepistemic modalityNothing would accomplish that.

The verbs in this list all have the following characteristics:

  1. They are auxiliary verbs, which means they allow subject-auxiliary inversion and can take the negation not,
  2. They convey functional meaning,
  3. They are defective insofar as they cannot be inflected, nor do they appear in non-finite form (i.e. not as infinitives, gerunds, or participles),
  4. They are nevertheless always finite and thus appear as the root verb in their clause, and
  5. They subcategorize for an infinitive, i.e. they take an infinitive as their complement

The verbs/expressions dare, ought to, had better, and need not behave like modal auxiliaries to a large extent, although they are not productive in the role to the same extent as those listed here. Furthermore, there are numerous other verbs that can be viewed as modal verbs insofar as they clearly express modality in the same way that the verbs in this list do, e.g. appear, have to, seem, etc. In the strict sense, though, these other verbs do not qualify as modal verbs in English because they do not allow subject-auxiliary inversion, nor do they allow negation with not. If, however, one defines modal verb entirely in terms of meaning contribution, then these other verbs would also be modals and so the list here would have to be greatly expanded.

[edit] Meaning contribution

A modal auxiliary verb gives more information about the function of the main verb that follows it. Although they have a great variety of communicative uses, these functions can all be related to a scale ranging from possibility (may) to necessity (must). Within this scale there are two functional divisions:

  • Epistemic modality: concerned with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true (including likelihood, and certainty); and
  • Deontic modality: concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including ability, permission, and duty)

The following sentences illustrate the two uses of must:

  • Deontic: You must leave now. = 'You are required to leave now.'
  • Epistemic: You must be starving. = 'It is necessarily the case that you are starving.'
  • Deontic: You must speak Spanish. = 'It is a requirement that you speak Spanish (if you want to get a job in Spain).'
  • Epistemic: You must speak Spanish. = 'It is surely the case that you speak Spanish (after having lived in Spain for ten years).'

Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.

Another use of modal auxiliaries is to indicate dynamic modality, which refers to properties such as ability or disposition.[3] Some examples of this are can in English, können in German, and possum in Latin. For example, I can say that in English, Ich kann das auf Deutsch sagen, and Illud Latine dicere possum.

[edit] Defective

Modals in English form a very distinctive class of verbs. They are auxiliary verbs like be, do, and have, but they are defective insofar as they cannot be inflected like these other auxiliary verbs, e.g. havehas vs. should*shoulds, dodid vs. may*mayed, etc. In clauses that contain two or more verbs, any modal that is present appears as the left-most verb in the verb catena (= chain of verbs). What this means is that the modal verb is always finite (although it is, as stated, never inflected). In the syntactic structure of the clause, the modal verb is the clause root. The following dependency grammar trees illustrate the point:

Modal trees 1'

The verb catenae are in blue. The modal auxiliary in both trees is the root of the entire sentence. The verb that is immediately subordinate to the modal is always an infinitive. The fact that modal auxiliaries in English are necessarily finite means that within the minimal finite clause that contains them, they can never be subordinate to another verb, e.g.

a. Sam may have done his homework. - The modal auxiliary may is the root of the clause.
b. *Sam has may done his homeowork. - The sentence fails because the modal auxiliary may is not the root of the clause.
a. Jim will be helped. - The modal auxiliary will is the root of the clause.
b. *Jim is will be helped. - The sentence fails because the modal auxiliary will is not the root of the clause.

This trait of modal auxiliaries has motivated the designation defective, that is, modal auxiliaries are defective in English because they are so limited in their form and distribution. One can note further in this area that English modal auxiliaries are quite unlike modal verbs in closely related languages. In German, for instance, modals can occur as non-finite verbs, which means they can be subordinate to other verbs in verb catenae; they need not appear as the clause root.

[edit] List of Germanic etymological relatives

The table below lists some modal verbs with common roots in English, German and Dutch. English modal auxiliary verb provides an exhaustive list of modal verbs in English, and German verb#Modal verbs provides a list for German, with translations. Dutch verbs#Irregular verbs gives conjugations for some Dutch modals.

Words in the same row of the table below share the same etymological root. Because of semantic drift, however, words in the same row may no longer be proper translations of each other. In addition, the English and German verbs will are completely different in meaning, and the German one has nothing to do with constructing the future tense. These words are false friends.

In English, the plural and singular forms are identical. For German and Dutch, both the plural and singular form of the verb are shown.

Etymological relatives (not translations)

cankönnen, kannkunnen, kan
shallsollen, sollzullen, zal
willwollen, willwillen, wil
mustmüssen, mussmoeten, moet
maymögen, magmogen, mag
tharf[4]dürfen, darfdurven, durf

The English could is the preterite form of can; should is the preterite of shall; and might is the preterite of may. (This is ignoring the use of "may" as a vestige of the subjunctive mood in English.) These verbs have acquired an independent, present tense meaning. The German verb möchten is sometimes taught as a vocabulary word and included in the list of modal verbs, but it is actually the past subjunctive form of mögen.

The English verbs dare and need have both a modal use (he dare not do it), and a non-modal use (he doesn't dare to do it). The Dutch verb durven is not considered a modal (but it is there, nevertheless) because its modal use has disappeared, but it has a non-modal use analogous with the English dare. Some English modals consist of more than one word, such as "had better" and "would rather".[5]

Some other English verbs express modality although they are not modal verbs because they are not auxiliaries, including want, wish, hope, and like. All of these differ from the modals in English (with the disputed exception of ought (to)) in that the associated main verb takes its long infinitive form with the particle to rather than its short form without to, and in that they are fully conjugated.

[edit] Morphology and syntax

Germanic modal verbs are preterite-present verbs, which means that their present tense has the form of a vocalic preterite. This is the source of the vowel alternation between singular and plural in German and Dutch. Because of their preterite origins, modal verbs also lack the suffix (-s in modern English, -t in German and Dutch) that would normally mark the third person singular form:

 normal verbmodal verb
Englishhe workshe can
Germaner arbeiteter kann
Dutchhij werkthij kan

The main verb that is modified by the modal verb is in the infinitive form and is not preceded by the word to (German: zu, Dutch: te). There are verbs that may seem somewhat similar in meaning to modal verbs (e.g. like, want), but the construction with such verbs would be different:

 normal verbmodal verb
Englishhe tries to workhe can work
Germaner versucht zu arbeitener kann arbeiten
Dutchhij probeert te werkenhij kan werken

In English, main verbs but not modal verbs always require the auxiliary verb do to form negations and questions, and do can be used with main verbs to form emphatic affirmative statements. Neither negations nor questions in early modern English used to require do.

 normal verbmodal verb
affirmativehe workshe can work
negationhe does not workhe cannot work
emphatiche does work hardhe can work hard
questiondoes he work here?can he work at all?
negation + questiondoes he not work here?can he not work at all?

(German never uses "do" as an auxiliary verb for any function; Dutch uses "do" as an auxiliary, but only in colloquial speech)

In English, modal verbs are called defective verbs because of their incomplete conjugation: they have a narrower range of functions than ordinary verbs. For example, most have no infinitive or gerund.

[edit] Evolution of modals

Deontic (agent-oriented) usages of modals tend to develop earlier than epistemic uses, and the former give rise to the latter.[6]:pp.192-199 For example, the inferred certainty sense of English "must" developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of "should" developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility sense of "may" and "can" developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are:

  • internal mental ability → internal ability → root possibility (internal or external ability) → permission and epistemic possibility
  • obligation → probability

[edit] Modals in non-Germanic languages

[edit] Hawaiian Creole English

Hawaiian Creole English is a creole language most of whose vocabulary, but not grammar, is drawn from English. As is generally the case with creole languages, it is an isolating language and modality is typically indicated by the use of invariant pre-verbal auxiliaries.[7] The invariance of the modal auxiliaries to person, number, and tense makes them analogous to modal auxiliaries in English. However, as in most creoles the main verbs are also invariant; the auxiliaries are distinguished by their use in combination with (followed by) a main verb.

There are various preverbal modal auxiliaries: kaen "can", laik "want to", gata "have got to", haeftu "have to", baeta "had better", sapostu "am/is/are supposed to". Unlike in Germanic languages, tense markers are used, albeit infrequently, before modals: gon kaen kam "is going to be able to come". Waz "was" can indicate past tense before the future/volitional marker gon and the modal sapostu: Ai waz gon lift weits "I was gonna lift weights"; Ai waz sapostu go "I was supposed to go".

[edit] Hawaiian

Hawaiian, like the Polynesian languages generally, is an isolating language, so its verbal grammar exclusively relies on unconjugated verbs. Thus, as with creoles, there is no real distinction between modal auxiliaries and lexically modal main verbs that are followed by another main verb. Hawaiian has an imperative indicated by e + verb (or in the negative by mai + verb). Some examples of the treatment of modality are as follows:[8]:pp. 38–39 Pono conveys obligation/necessity as in He pono i na kamali'i a pau e maka'ala, "It's right for children all to beware", "All children should/must beware"; ability is conveyed by hiki as in Ua hiki i keia kamali'i ke heluhelu "Has enabled to this child to read", "This child can read".

[edit] French

French, like other Romance languages, has no modal auxiliary verbs; instead, it expresses modality using conjugated verbs followed by infinitives: for example, pouvoir "to be able" (Je peux aller, "I can go"), devoir "to have an obligation" (Je dois aller, "I must go"), and vouloir "to want" (Je veux aller "I want to go").

[edit] Mandarin Chinese

Mandarin Chinese is an isolating language without inflections. As in English, modality can be indicated either lexically, with main verbs such as yào "want" followed by another main verb, or with auxiliary verbs. In Mandarin the auxiliary verbs have six properties that distinguish them from main verbs:[9]:pp.173-174

  • They must co-occur with a verb (or an understood verb).
  • They cannot be accompanied by aspect markers.
  • They cannot be modified by intensifiers such as "very".
  • They cannot be nominalized (used in phrases meaning, for example, "one who can")
  • They cannot occur before the subject.
  • They cannot take a direct object.

The complete list of modal auxiliary verbs[9]:pp.182-183 consists of

  • three meaning "should",
  • four meaning "be able to",
  • two meaning "have permission to",
  • one meaning "dare",
  • one meaning "be willing to",
  • four meaning "must" or "ought to", and
  • one meaning "will" or "know how to".

[edit] Spanish

Spanish, like French, uses fully conjugated verbs followed by infinitives. For example, poder "to be able" (Puedo andar, "I can go"), deber "to have an obligation" (Debo andar, "I should go"), and querer "to want" (Quiero andar "I want to go").

The correct use of andar in these examples would be reflexive. "Puedo andar" means "I can walk", "Puedo irme" means "I can go" or "I can take myself off/away". The same apllies to the other examples.

  • -1

i mean you are hot

  • -1

what do u mean

  • -1

hi marhaba hw r u?

  • -1

Modal auxiliary verbs are used to show a necessity, capability, willingness, or possibility. Unlike most verbs, there is only one form of these verbs. Typically, verb forms change to indicate whether the sentence's structure is singular or plural. Most verbs also indicate whether something happened in the past, present, or future. This is not the case with most modal auxiliary verbs, which makes them simpler to understand and use correctly.

Examples of Modal Auxiliary Verbs

So, now that we understand the purpose of modal auxiliary verbs, let's take a look at some of the common ones you may see in writing. The modal auxiliary verbs include:

  • Can
  • Could
  • May
  • Might
  • Must
  • Ought
  • Shall
  • Should
  • Will
  • Would
  • -1
Modal Auxiliary. ... Helping?verbs?or auxiliary verbs?such as will, shall, may, might, can, could, must, ought to, should, would, used to, need are used in conjunction with main?verbs?to express shades of time and mood. The combination of helping?verbs?with main?verbs?creates what are called verb?phrases or?verb?strings.
  • 0
Please find this answer

  • 1
These are verbs which help the main verbs to complete the meaning in a sentence. ?Modals do not have- s, -ing, -ed or -en forms. ?Modals are followed by only the base form of verb. Examples: can do, shall sit, will, eat. ?Modals modify the meaning of the main verb. Examples: a. She can dance for hours. b. He cannot cook.
  • 1
Modal auxiliary
  • 0
Please find this answer

  • 1
I want online classes man

  • -1
  • 0
If Mexico
  • 0
I love you?????
  • 0
Please find this answer

  • 0
What are you looking for?