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?
23 июля 2019 г., 15:32
Ответы · 4
Thank you Chris, your advice always is really good
23 июля 2019 г.
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).
23 июля 2019 г.
Thank you Kyler Shea, very good answer, it's clear!
23 июля 2019 г.
"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
23 июля 2019 г.
Все еще не нашли ответы?
Напишите свои вопросы, и пусть вам помогут носители языка!