|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Grammar and Linguistics > Modals of deduction
Modals of deduction
|
|
yanogator
|
|
Sorry to have to disagree with you zailda, but (here in the US, at least), "may", "might" and "could" all mean it �s possible, and none are as strong as "probably".
"Probably" means more than a 50% chance (and usually stronger than that), and the others just indicate more than a 0% chance, so they aren �t the same.
Bruce |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
zailda
|
|
As we say in Brazil, "I �m selling the fish for the same price I bought it." That �s the explanation I have in my book to give my students; that �s the way I �ve learned it; that �s the way more than one American explained us teachers during our teachers � course.
As I �m pretty bad at math I know nothing about the percentage of the probability or possibility, but even in the students � book there are some sentences to be changed using may, might, must:
Sandy is probably at home.
Sandy perhaps is at home.
Sandy is either at home or at her aunt �s.
But I can �t tell you if it means 50%, more than 0% or almost 100%. |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
yanogator
|
|
zailda, of course we can �t expect you to know any more than you were taught. We all assume that those who teach us know what they are talking about. That �s why I like to answer questions here when I can - The questions are evidence that the teachers here want to be as good as possible, and give their students the most reliable information.
As for the percentages, you �ll notice that mine were not very specific. I �ve found that people who assign more specific percentages are usually being more speculative than they should.
Bruce |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
zailda
|
|
Well, maybe I should throw away all my grammar books then, and ask a native every time I want to know about a grammar rule. |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
perma
|
Hi Zailda and everyone else!
I vaguely remember being taught as a student that there was a difference between "may/might/could", although I think I was taught something different from you: That "may/could" imply that the probability is bigger, while "might" implys that it �s not that probable.
However there is no such distinction in any of the books I �ve been using in recent years to teach my students. So I guess either my english teacher so many years ago was mistaken, or the use of the modals has changed over time and the difference no longer exists.
In this case I �d say that a native speaker is a more reliable source of information, as they follow the language as it evolves, while our grammar books are static. Of course I wouldn �t trust even a native speaker, unless I knew he/she was an educated person, which we all are here.
As you say, just my 2pence!
Hugs from Greece 
|
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
yanogator
|
|
Yes, I �m sure that at one time there was a distinction between "may" and "might", since "might" is the conditional form of "may." That distinction, whatever it was, seems to be a thing of the past.
Bruce |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
zailda
|
|
You see, English as a Second Language is not particularly related to �how Americans use the language nowadays�, although the books I�ve been using for more than 12 years (updated from time to time, of course) include an �American Usage Section� at the end of some lessons.
The information is important (if it reflects the way native Americans use the language, not only you or people from a specific region or degree of education) and I�ll add it the next time I deal with the topic with my students. |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
aliciapc
|
Bruce, your explanations are always clear ! And Mish, you �re just as helpful as him! Thank you both  |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
zailda
|
|
And thank you Alicia for your intervention and also the consideration.
Maybe it looks like something else, but when I answered the post I was only trying to help. I am a stubborn who won�t accept the reason �because I�m a native� when talking about grammar. I might / may / must be wrong (whatever you think that suits the situation), of course, but your post wasn�t nice (or at least not so nice as I would expect from you), but I�ll accept it because I�m not always nice � if I am at any occasion. |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
|
yanogator
|
|
Zailda,
I think your comment of "your post wasn �t nice" was directed at me, so I apologize for not being nice, because, like you, my intention was only to be helpful. You said, "Maybe it looks like something else, but when I answered the post I was only trying to help", and it definitely didn �t look like something else.
If I sounded condescending, I apologize for that, too. My point was that both you and I can only provide what we think is the best information. If my information disagrees with yours, please don �t take it as a personal attack. Since no others have told us that British usage differs from US on this point, this might be more than simply "how Americans use the language nowadays."
I hope we �re still friends,
Bruce |
5 Dec 2010
|
|
< Previous
1
2
3
Next >
|
