3

Example 1

I am happy I could help you.

I remember "could" is used to talk about general ability in the past.

So, why is it being used here? Is it because it is in a subordinate clause?

I remember "could" can refer to a one-time thing in a subordinate clause if the main clause is in the past because it has to be backshifted.

So, why?

Maybe we should say,

Example 2

I am happy I was able to help you.

Improve this question
1
  • So, why is it being used here? Is it because it is in a subordinate clause? If you saw this sentence, which it seems you did, you must tell us where.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented May 13 at 19:13

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
6

'Could' is used to indicate possibility.

'Able' is related to ability.

Arguably "I'm glad I could help you" could refer to things that made it possible for you to help - the circumstances, timing etc - while "I'm glad I was able to help you" focuses on your ability, means, authority etc.

However, there is also an overlap in the meaning of these two words as well as in some of the other concepts I have mentioned such as 'means', 'circumstance' etc. As a consequence, these two words don't have much difference in everyday speech and you will find them used interchangeably. I've only analysed the meanings because of the question - no English speaker hearing either of these would think that deeply about the difference.

Improve this answer
6
  • 5
    "Could" can also refer to ability, since it is the past of "can". "When I was younger I could drive a car, but now my eyesight isn't good enough".
    – DJClayworth
    Commented May 13 at 16:48
  • 3
    "As kids we could stay up until 9.00 pm” (permission) “My nan could swim ten lengths of the pool when she was in her 70s“ that's ability, not possibility nor permission.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented May 13 at 16:58
  • 1
    In fact, I would say that in this example could has exactly the sense of ability. Personally I think the distinction being drawn here is rather arbitrary, and I'd be comfortable using both forms interchangeably, and with both meanings.
    – Peter Kirkpatrick
    Commented May 13 at 20:58
  • In this specific phrase, possibility without having actually done so would be expressed using "could have helped", rather than "could help".
    – Flater
    Commented May 14 at 5:47
  • @DJClayworth You're going down a rabbithole... "I could play the piano before I had my hands cut off" - has the person lost their ability, or their means? If they received prosthetic hands, does that bestow ability on them again? What I have tried to do in my brief answer is show that there is a difference linguistically, but that it doesn't really matter. I've not laid down any hard rules saying you can't use one or the other.
    – Astralbee
    Commented May 14 at 7:44
1

In example 1, "could" is being used to describe an ability in the past. The person was able to help, and they are happy about it. Let's consider a conversation:

I need to exchange this thing for a new one.

I can help you. Here is a new one.

Thank you. You have helped me.

I'm happy I could help.

"I can help" is present tense, indicating that they are able to help right now. "I could help" is just that switched to past tense.

Because "could" is also used in the conditional case it is possible to mistake the meaning of "could". "I could help you" on its own might be about the past, but is normally used for the conditional. Therefore you will rarely find it used to indicate the past, unless the context makes it clear that it means that. Putting it in this kind of clause is a good way of indicating that. But you can also use "could" in other ways.

"When I was younger I could drive a car, but now my eyesight is poor and I cannot."

Example 2 is also correct.

Improve this answer
0

You must log in to answer this question.

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