1

I am practicing English with some friends. When it comes to a regular conversation, I can communicate pretty well, but I'm not really into grammar rules. So, in one specific occasion , one of these friends asked me why I didn't use the auxiliary "to be" in this sentence, "We should start talking in English from now on", since it is on present continuous tense. He mentioned that he thought it should be something like: "we are should".

Again, I'm not really into rules, but I could say this is wrong (it is, right?). But the question is: is this sentence, "We should start talking in English from now on", grammatically correct? Or is it one of that stuff that people use in the wrong way?

2
  • 1
    Fyi, we generally would say" We should start speaking in English. "We are should" is a no-go, Houston. [one of those things, not stuff] Also, you should ask this on the other English-language site: ELL, and not here. :)
    – Lambie
    Jul 23, 2022 at 17:38
  • I made a quick adjust, because in the real situation it was "typing", not speaking. But I get your point. And ty for the relocation. Jul 23, 2022 at 19:00

1 Answer 1

2

"We are should...." is incorrect grammar. The present continuous is formed of "be verb"+"present participle". And should isn't a present participle.

Instead, the modal verb "should" functions as the auxiliary verb, the pattern is "modal"+"bare infinitive": We should start ....

There is no present continuous tense in your sentence

... should[modal] start[bare infinitive verb] talking[participle, complement to "start"]...

And "We should start talking ...." is correct English grammar. That said, I think "speaking (in) English" sounds better to me than "talking English"

1
  • 4
    Agreed. That said, I think "speaking (in) English" sounds better to me than "talking English". Jul 24, 2022 at 0:57

You must log in to answer this question.

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