14 votes

"…are not having to live in bunkers…"

The continuous tense is used here to emphasise that the situation is temporary. The intention is obviously to contrast the situation in Russia with that in Ukraine. It would be possible to say that ...
user avatar
  • 32.6k
3 votes

Confused about "he might have gone"

You're thinking about things in the wrong order. Here is the "right" way: Take two sentences. "He will go there", "He might go there". The first is about a certain ...
user avatar
  • 154k
3 votes

How does "would" work in this sentence?

Is "would" the past tense here? No, it's the conditional. The sentence implies that, if you wished to use a different verb instead of seal, that would be secure.
user avatar
  • 32.6k
2 votes

Tom should be awake

In ordinary speech, they are often used interchangeably, and a particular nuance or shade of meaning may be implied by the context, tone of voice, etc, but these observations may be useful: a. It is ...
user avatar
2 votes

Can we use must + V1 to show certainty

Yes. Modals usually have an epistemic reading (showing the quality of the speaker's knowledge or certainty) as well as their normal deontic reading, and the epistemic reading of must is a conclusion ...
user avatar
  • 65.2k
1 vote
Accepted

What is the appropriate use of the modal 'Could' in this example?

I think it's fine as it is - as far as the second person is concerned it is a hypothetical. But Yes you could is probably a more natural reply. [Note that for many English speakers I couldn't say ...
user avatar
  • 65.2k
1 vote

"…are not having to live in bunkers…"

It's grammatical (as explained by @Kate Bunting), but it sounds unnatural to me. A more common way to say it would be Russians in St. Petersburg or Moscow or Samara do not have to live in bunkers or ...
user avatar
  • 1,991
1 vote

each of us might get fired

a) each might "possibly none to all" b) might each "none to all" c) might all "possibly all as a group" d) every one "anyone or all" A better "singular&...
user avatar
1 vote

each of us might get fired

I would read a and b to mean "any one of us might get fired" )with a being my preference of those two options) while d would be "We are facing being fired as a group". e just ...
user avatar
1 vote

could do anything

Both are perfectly acceptable and have the same meaning: that when he was drunk, nobody could tell what he was going to do, and anything could happen. When he was drunk, he was unpredictable. He ...
user avatar
  • 2,823
1 vote

could vs was able to: When should I choose "was able to"?

When used by itself, could generally means the same thing as be able to. However, could takes on a completely different meaning when you use it with a past participle. Because of this, I don't think ...
user avatar
  • 2,823
1 vote
Accepted

Using passive voise

You're trying to get the tenses of "had" and "was" to agree.  Don't.  They can't.  The tenses interfere with each other, even when they are both in the same tense.  The passive ...
user avatar
1 vote

The use of "would" as the future in the past

Note that “would” can be used to indicate repetitive behavior in the past. He and Jack would meet for drinks most Friday nights. In this passage, which is indirect thought in the past, the meaning ...
user avatar
  • 28.9k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible