MODAL VERBS

1. Identify the different modal verbs in the following comic strip and say what they are expressing in each case.

But when it comes to identifying what they are expressing some questions may arise: Why does Hobbes
use have to and not must in picture 1? Would it be the same? What is the difference between can in
picture 3 and picture 10?
We need to analyse MODAL VERBS individually to be able to answer these questions.
Modal Auxiliaries, often called just “modals” are a group of verbs with special characteristics:
 Modal verbs do not have inflection, that is they don’t change with the different persons and they do
not have past forms or ING forms:
I must work….. He must work
 Modal verbs express a notion, that is an idea which is associated to them
must expresses obligation
 Modal verbs are incomplete if they are not followed by another verb that “completes” their meaning.
He must. (we understand it is an obligation but we don’t know obligation to do what)
According to these characteristics, the modal verbs are must, can, may, should, could, might,
will and shall. There are others, which are not very frequent. Although have to does not have the
three characteristics mentioned (because it has inflections; have to, has to, don’t have to, had to), it will
be included in this analysis because it is, as some grammarians call it, a semi-modal.
We will divide the modals according to the notion they express but you will see that some of them can
express more than only one idea.
What’s more, what makes modal verbs complicated is the fact that they express one idea, but that idea
can be influenced by psychological pressures in communication. Politeness, irony, more or less certainty
also play a role when we choose a modal verb. To sum up, the choice of modal verb depends very much
on the ATTITUDE of the speakers, how that speaker personally sees facts.
1
 MODAL VERBS EXPRESSING OBLIGATION or other form of authority

 OBLIGATION: MUST – HAVE TO

 RECOMMENDATION: SHOULD(N’T)
 REQUIREMENT: NEED
 LACK OF OBLIGATION/NECESSITY: DON’T/DOESN’T HAVE TO – DON’T/DOESN’T NEED TO
 PERMISSION: CAN – MAY
 PROHIBITION: MUSTN'T – CAN’T
 OBLIGATION IN THE PAST: HAD TO
 REGRET/REPROACH: SHOULD(N’T) HAVE+ VERB PAST PART
 LACK OF NECESSITY IN THE PAST: DIDN’T NEED TO – NEEDN’T HAVE+VERB PAST PART
 ABILITY: CAN – CAN’T

 OBLIGATION
Both must and have to express obligation and there is no difference in how strong one or the other is.
The difference is who the obligation comes from, i.e. who has decided that that action is obligatory. When
we use MUST, the obligation comes from the speaker; when we use HAVE TO, the obligation is imposed
but we don’t know who imposes it; we understand it is a general rule for everybody.

Compare: A mother to her child: “You must clean your bedroom”

A teacher to his course: “You must read the lessons every week”

In both cases, the mother and the teacher are the authorities in the context.

Students have to have the 60% of attendance at ISFD 88

You have to be 18 to get your driving licence.

In these two cases, we don’t know who has decided on these rules but we follow them.

To understand the idea of attitude that modals carry consider these two ideas, both expressing obligation:

“I must stop at red traffic lights”

“I have to stop at red traffic lights”

Which one is correct? Both, because it depends on your idea. In the first one, you use must because
YOU believe that it is the correct thing to do, to be a good citizen. In the second one, you don’t want to
receive a fine so you stop but just because it is a rule.

And these examples also show why it is generally said that must expresses “internal obligation” . I must
stop shows my inner conscience. HOWEVER, the idea of internal obligation is not fully correct because it
can’t account for the use of must in the following example:

Teacher: “Students must only use English in my classes”

She is the authority and she decides about her classes. NO internal obligation. So do not use this
incomplete idea. Right?

 OBLIGATION IN THE PAST

As MUST is a modal verb, it has no form for the past so obligation in the past, no matter where the
obligation came from, is expressed with HAD TO + Verb in the base form and its absence with DIDN’T
HAVE TO + Verb in the base form.

My father had to work when he was a child but he didn’t have to give all his money
to his family.

2
 LACK or ABSENCE OF OBLIGATION versus PROHIBITION
It is important to understand this difference: lack of obligation DON'T or DOESN'T HAVE TO means
you could choose whether to do it or not without consequences, but if you do it, nothing happens.

Students at ISFD 88 don't have to wear pinafores (but if you want to wear them, it is OK)

Prohibition means that if you did that action, it would have negative consequences

Students mustn't cheat on exams (if you do, you will be expelled)

 RECOMMENDATION
We use SHOULD(N'T) to make a recommendation about what we think is a good idea or a convenient
decision. We can also use it to say what we think is the right or correct thing to do. In all these cases we
could also use OUGHT TO or OUGHT NOT TO, with the same meaning.

 REGRET – REPROACH
You regret something when you think you have made a mistake or you haven’t done something which
was necessary. You reproach when you criticize what somebody did or didn’t do. In both cases, you are
speaking about the past and that is why you need the modal + the perfective, that is SHOULD HAVE +
VERB PAST PARTICIPLE.

I shouldn't have talked to you like that. I’m sorry.

You should have studied more for this exam if you wanted a better grade.

 REQUIREMENT – LACK OF NECESSITY

The verb NEED is a modal verb when it is not followed by TO but today it is practically not used as such.
We tend to use need to as a full verb with inflections. Anyway, we use need for requirements (for an
application, for instructions) and don't/doesn't need to when something is not necessary.
However when we are speaking about the past, there are two possibilities according to the meaning: we
use DIDN'T NEED TO, when the action was not necessary and we didn’t do it, but we use NEEDN'T
HAVE + VERB PAST PARTICIPLE, when the action was not necessary but we did it all the same.

Did you sign the form?

- No, I read the instructions first and I didn't need to sign it. So I didn't sign it
- Yes. I read the instructions after I had signed it. I signed it although I needn't have
signed it.
 PERMISSION
The difference between MAY and CAN to express permission is the same as must and have to for
obligation: where the authority comes from. MAY, like must, lays the authority on the speaker so this
person decides if HE himself will give the permission or not. CAN, on the other hand, is more connected
with rules or permission in general.
This explains why it is generally said that MAY I..? is more polite for a request. It is simply because we
are accepting the authority of the other person and that is why we choose may. So we can use it when
speaking to superiors or elderly people. At the same time, the use of may in affirmative sentences can
show condescension or a feeling of superiority and it sounds more like an order.

All students can leave the room if they need to. (general rule)
OK, people. You may leave ( it is early but the teacher decides to stop for the day)

The verb ALLOW (generally in passive) is also used to express permission, but it is not a modal verb
because it can be inflected (allowed – allowing – etc)
CAN'T as absence of permission is more frequently used as a less strict equivalent of MUSTN'T.

3
 ABILITY
Ability is an activity that we do well because we have studied it or/and practised it. Be careful not to
confuse it with possibility and think that in Spanish we do not use any modal verb.

Let’s compare: In English: Messi can play football very well.

In Spanish: Messi juega muy bien al football.

We use CAN to describe an ability and CAN'T to describe lack of ability, which is not necessarily a
disability. Careful!

BE ABLE TO also expresses ability, but again, it is not a modal verb. It generally indicates that there
was a difficulty which has been overcome, but can is also acceptable in this case.
COULD describes a general past activity during a period of time. WAS ABLE/WERE ABLE TO
describes having the ability and doing something successfully on one occasion.

She could swim 200 metres when she was nine.

Maria was able to swim to the rocks and rescue the child.

2. Write the ideas indicated always using a modal verb.

a. Rules for students at the Institute (regulations, permission, optional things)

b. Two pieces of advice for a future student at the Prof.

c. A regret about your studies.

d. An ability that you have.

e. Something special that you had the ability of doing in your past.

f. Chores which you are asked to do at home (if there aren’t any, express so)

g. What you feel as an obligation for your future.

h. Something you did which was not necessary. Explain why.

i. A reproach for a teacher at your secondary school.

j. A prohibition in your country.

4