Community Web Version Now Available
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?
Jul 23, 2019 3:32 PM
4
0
Answers · 4
Thank you Chris, your advice always is really good
July 23, 2019
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).
July 23, 2019
Thank you Kyler Shea, very good answer, it's clear!
July 23, 2019
"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
July 23, 2019
Andrés
Language Skills
English, French, Portuguese, Spanish
Learning Language
English, French, Portuguese