0

A colleague used a phrase (fitting the context incredibly well), which everybody reacted to as quite unusual. Then, we had a discussion whether it's grammatically correct. In fact, we're not certain if it's proper English and it boils down (according to me) to whether can may be used in infinite tense.

The context (not relevant for the grammatical correctness but possibly nice to know) is that a person can't perform an action. It's a reference to Terminator 3, where someone angrily throws out Drop dead! and Arnie replies I'm unable to comply., in a phlegmatic manner. In our case, the person communicates that they can't do something, which is an inability to being able to do it.

I'm unable to can.

Obviously, there are more natural ways to express it. We're not looking for those alternatives. We'd like to know if the correct pattern of I'm unable to jump or I'm unable to answer may be applied on I'm unable to can. It's an auxiliary verb and it just sounds clunky. On the other hand, I'm unable to be feels fine.

Improve this question
7
  • Since I can means I am able to, it would be sufficient to say "I'm unable to."
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented May 26 at 7:40
  • @KateBunting Yes, that's correct. I'm not entirely certain, though, why you mentioned that. As I explained in the question (or at least tried to), we're aware of more natural, conventional and intuitive formulations. The thing was to use an uncommon phrasing in order to disarm a tense situation in a amusing way (which, by the way, succeeded). We'll be using that phrase regardless but were curious if it's grammatically correct.
    – Konrad Viltersten
    Commented May 26 at 9:24
  • I mentioned it to show you that can is completely wrong here grammatically. You wouldn't say "I'm unable to am able to", would you?
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented May 26 at 12:57
  • @KateBunting I see. That point swooshed over my head, regrettably. I understand now, though, the intended message. Thanks. However, I wonder... While I definitely wouldn't say what you wrote above, I could (stylistics and weirdness aside) say I'm unable to be able to..., couldn't I? I mean, ...to am able... is just so wrong. But the modified version... What do you think?
    – Konrad Viltersten
    Commented May 26 at 16:40
  • James's answer covers this. It's technically grammatical, but a very odd thing to say.
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented May 26 at 16:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6

It is incorrect, (unless you mean the non-modal verb "can" meaning to store something in a sealed container)

Modal verbs are defective in various ways, and one way that "can" is defective is that it doesn't form the "to" infinitive. It is simply a grammar error to say "unable to can".

It is possible to say "I'm unable to be able" However the meaning of this is rather unclear. But I would never say this, because it is a very unusual situation. Either I'd say "I can't" or I would feel the need to explain. "I'm unable to get ready for the interview because ..." Rather than "I'm unable to be able to interview"

Improve this answer
1
  • Perfectly clear. Thanks. The message in that (grammatically flawed) form was meant to be weirdly phrased, indeed. Now that I analyze it deeper, I see that what we meant was I'm unable to bring up the motivation or energy to performed the requested task also indicating (or emphasizing) that the disability is not a choice of the speaker but an externally imposed limitation. One can consider it a double lack of ability: not only can't you do it - you also can't be able to do it. Yes, it's redundant meaning. But it was meant to convey it in a amusing way.
    – Konrad Viltersten
    Commented May 26 at 9:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .