Andrés
Is "would" more than an auxiliare verb? Look at this sentence: "Sunscreen emboldens us to spend longer in the Sun than we would otherwise" Why "would" doesn't need here of any complementary verb? Can "would" work alone? Can I change "would" for "could" on this example?
2019년 7월 23일 오후 3:32
답변 · 4
Thank you Chris, your advice always is really good
2019년 7월 23일
Would takes a verb object. Here "we would " is an elliptical version of "we would spend." The statement is an implicit type 2 conditional. (rephrase) "Sunscreen emboldens us to spend more time in the sun than we WOULD SPEND otherwise (= if we didn't use/have sunscreen). Here, the modal could can replace would with no significant change in meaning. Like would, could takes a verb object. (rephrase) "Sunscreen emboldens us to spend more time in the sun than we COULD SPEND otherwise (= if we didn't use/have sunscreen).
2019년 7월 23일
Thank you Kyler Shea, very good answer, it's clear!
2019년 7월 23일
"Would" is a verb. It doesn't need a complimentary verb. It works alone. You can change "would" for "could" but the meaning is a little different. Also, switching "otherwise" and "would" sounds more natural. You can say: "Sunscreen emboldens us to spend longer in the Sun than we otherwise would" "Sunscreen emboldens us to spend longer in the Sun than we otherwise could" Both are good sentences
2019년 7월 23일
아직도 답을 찾지 못하셨나요?
질문을 남겨보세요. 원어민이 도움을 줄 수 있을 거예요!