(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

keri
2008-11-25 09:11 pm UTC (link)

If I say "I used to could watch that on tv," I'd be saying that in the past, but not any more, there was the possibility of watching that on tv, and I was able to act on it, but I didn't necessarily do so. I guess it's like "I used to be able to" but with three fewer words? and the inflection is a bit different, but I'm not sure how to explain it. I think with "used to be able to," it's implied that the speaker *did* do whatever it was.

Whereas "I could watch that on tv" is ambiguous about when that possibility occurred and "I used to watch that on tv" states that it definitely happened.

"might could" is the future form. There really isn't a present tense version, since it's all about possibilities and not what's actually going on.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	seraangelus 2008-11-26 03:33 am UTC (link)
	Hmm, see I'd say 'I could have watched that on TV when it was on.' and then you could go from there. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	keri 2008-11-26 03:58 am UTC (link)
	Maybe, but it sounds like it should have a different meaning to me. :P I just love the double modals, and have been using them for as long as I can remember. Except when I was in high school and was convinced that the dialect I grew up speaking was backwards and crass. Alas. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	lyssa 2008-11-26 09:10 am UTC (link)
	I generally say "I used to be able to ____." =o (Reply to this)(Parent)

	eilan 2008-11-26 11:07 am UTC (link)
	I think with "used to be able to," it's implied that the speaker did* do whatever it was.* Well, ergh... "be able to" is the same as "can", just as "have to" is the same as "must". (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -