Past Perfect/ Past Subjunctive + Can

Sssamy   Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:42 pm GMT
I conjured up passages with 'If I had thought I can ...' and 'If he knew he can ...' which to me sound okay, as I thought 'past perfect subjunctive' + can combinations and 'past subjunctive + can combinations were normally odd, but they could be allowed in some situations.

Do they sound natural?

[1] She sounded so grouchy when I called her. I called her then because I thought she would be so busy now. "If I had thought I can" call her now, I definitely would not have called her then. I knew she was naturally irritable after the way we fought.

[2] Everybody knows George can jump off now, but he is so frightened he thinks he can’t. "If he knew he can", we know he could do it right.
Uriel   Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:22 am GMT
I'm sorry, but those really don't sound natural to me. It would be "If I had thought I COULD call her now, I definitely would not have called her then."

Why? Because at the time of the action, which was in the past, what you are referring to as "now" was still sometime in the future -- so you would use "could", which is the future form of "can".

In the second, you have to say "If he knew he could" because again, "could" is the conditional demanded by the use of "knew". Sorry -- that's just how it works.
Clarke   Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:08 am GMT
< so you would use "could", which is the future form of "can". >

"Could" is the past tense form of "can", not the "future form".

The past tense form in the sentence is an example of backshift (or "concord of tenses" in indirect speech).

I don't think it would be too surprising to hear a native speaker say "If I had known that I can call her now, I wouldn't have called her then", if the situation was still current, because some speakers have less of a tendency to backshift.

It would be much more unusual in an edited text, e.g. a book or magazine.
greg   Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:33 am GMT
Uriel : « [...] "could", which is the future form of "can". »

Clarke : « "Could" is the past tense form of "can", not the "future form". »



Morphologiquement, <could> est la forme prétéritale de <can>. Mais en syntaxe, <could> ne renvoie pas forcément au passé linguistique — ni au passé chronologique :
— he can call her now
— he could call her now.
Dans les deux exemples ci-dessus, on est bien dans le présent d'énonciation. Les deux formes <can> et <could> sont compatibles avec la situation présente d'énonciation.






Dans la phrase <if I had thought I could call her now, I definitely would not have called her then>, les seuls marqueurs positifs de chronologie sont <now>={présent d'énonciation} et <then>={rupture avec le présent d'énonciation}. Le problème est que <then>, puisqu'il répond à <now>, peut renvoyer soit au passé chronologique, soit au futur chronologique. Il peut aussi renvoyer à du non-chronologique.

À mon avis, l'emploi de formes composées, telles que <have called> et <had thought>, indiquent que les verbes {appeler} et {penser} sont présentés sous l'aspect accompli — qui n'est pas nécessairement l'aspect révolu = le passé.

Dans <not have called>, l'aspect accompli de <call> est nié. Cette négation est introduite par <would> qui est ici un conditionnel (irréel, virtuel) et non un prétérit (passé factuel = révolu) — même si <would> est bien la forme prétéritale de <will>. Autrement dit, il me semble que <I would not have called her then> est la virtualisation de la négation de l'accompli situé en rupture avec le présent effectif (= le moment où je parle).

Ce conditionnel virtualisant fait suite à l'hypothèse posée par <if> suivi de <had> qui, de ce fait, vaut conditionnel — même si <had> est le prétérit morphologique de <have>. Selon moi, la forme accomplie <had thought>, précédée de <if>, est la supposition d'un événement accompli contrefactuel (virtuel) situé en rupture avec le présent d'énonciation. Mais la séquence <I could call her now> est repérée par <now> qui relie au présent effectif. D'ailleurs la phrase pourrait être changée comme suit : <if I had thought THEN I could call her now,I definitely would not have called her THEN>.

Il existe un lien de consécution imaginaire entre les deux entités virtuelles, mais elles sont toutes les deux en rupture avec le présent du locuteur. Et leur virtualité n'est pas celle d'un futur chronologique mais celle d'une hypothèse (if I had thought) qui porte sur un événement localisé dans le présent : [ ( I ) ↔ ( able to call her ) ] → [ now ].
Uriel   Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:26 am GMT
Could is definitely used to express future possibilities. I can't today, but I could tomorrow.
Uriel   Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:43 am GMT
Y saludos, greg! Hace mucho tiempo que no nos vemos!
Clarke   Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:53 pm GMT
<Could is definitely used to express future possibilities. I can't today, but I could tomorrow. >

That's true; but

<"could" ... is the future form of "can". >

isn't really the case.

Otherwise we would be unable to say "You can call her tomorrow"; and "You could have called her yesterday" would make no sense.

"Could" is, etymologically, the past tense of "can"; but in practice, the time reference is supplied by the context.
Uriel   Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:09 am GMT
No, because you can have more than one way to say something, and there are plenty of cases where one verb form does double duty in more than one tense -- look at hit.
greg   Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:20 am GMT
À Uriel : hola, ¿ que tal ? Spero che tutto va bene per te !
Kendra   Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:52 am GMT
''Could'' is past tense and present conditional of CAN.
''Could have'' is the past conditional of CAN.

You could call her now. [present conditional]
I couldn't call her. [past tense or present conditional].
I could have called her [past conditional]

''I couldn't do it'' both past tense or present conditional
''I could do it'' more likely present conditional
''I could have done it'' only past conditional
Pedant   Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:48 pm GMT
<< Spero che tutto va bene per te ! >>

Si deve usare il congiuntivo qui, perchè non è un fatto. Dopo i formi come 'sperare che', 'pensare che', 'volere che', 'credere che' etc, il congiuntivo è necessario.

Allora, la frase corretta sarebbe: 'Spero che tutto *vada* bene (per te)'.

Spero che questo commento ti abbia aiutato.
Clarke   Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:13 pm GMT
<No, because you can have more than one way to say something, and there are plenty of cases where one verb form does double duty in more than one tense -- look at hit. >

Both of those statements are true; but they don't relate to my point.

Earlier, you said:

<"could" ... is the future form of "can". >

Now if that were true, i.e. if "could" were *the* future form of "can", it would not be possible to use "can" in examples like this:

<You can call her tomorrow>

Look again at your original comment:

<Why? Because at the time of the action, which was in the past, what you are referring to as "now" was still sometime in the future -- so you would use "could", which is the future form of "can". >

This related to the sentence "If I had thought I COULD call her now, I definitely would not have called her then."

Change the example, but keep the structure:

<If he had thought I WOULD call her today, he definitely would not have given me her number.>

If your earlier analysis were true, with this parallel example we would have to say that "would" is the future form of "will", which is clearly incorrect.
Another Guest   Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:37 am GMT
<<Both of those statements are true; but they don't relate to my point. >>
It sure looks like they do. Your argument that it can't be the future tense because something else is the future tense denies that there can be two different future tenses. Whether it is the future tense or whether it is a tense that is used to discuss future events seems like hair-splitting to me, although Uriel's use of the definite article in describing it as "the future tense" would be a valid point for you to criticize.
Braz   Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:55 pm GMT
Could not future


could = conditional ( I could do it, if I had more time)
will be able to = future (I'll be able to do it, if I have more time)
greg   Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:13 pm GMT
Pedant : « Spero che questo commento ti abbia aiutato. »

Oui, merci infiniment. Je n'oublierai pas le subjonctif à l'avenir.