Talk:English markers of habitual aspect

[Untitled]
Although the content is clear, there are many basic grammatical errors in this article. May I suggest that a native speaker of English should edit the text? I suggest correction of one error of fact: When the adjectival form is followed by a verb, the present participle is used: I am used to going to college in the mornings. Rogercchristie (talk) 14:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree to edit by a native speaker. thank you Alborzagros (talk) 05:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Grammatical errors
I strongly do not recommend this article for learners of English, especially as a second language. This article has been written by a non-native speaker, and contains many errors, for example:
 * ... but this is sometimes in informal spoken English.
 * ... but this is sometimes used in informal spoken English.   Correct
 * ... but it is not usually right now.
 * ... but it does not usually happen right now.    Correct

Bad English language in an English Wikipedia article, about English grammar? It harms the reputation of Wikipedia. 85.193.214.212 (talk) 17:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

You have corrected the first sentence as I suggested, but the second one you have changed to: Your definition is too narrow. Every action can happen but not every action can "be used". If you used to drink coffee, now it almost never happens. Although it is grammatically correct, you would not say that "drinking coffee is no longer used by you", would you? Unless you want to teach your readers some weird artificial language. 85.193.232.158 (talk) 15:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It indicates that something was often repeated in the past, but it is not usually right now.

"Used to" is not a modal
As can be seen from the complete list of modals in English modal verbs, "used to" is not a modal. Modals express ability, permission/duty, or degree of likelihood, whereas the verbal auxiliary "used to" expresses habitual aspect. So I'm moving this article from its current title "English modals of habits and past facts" to "English markers of habitual aspect". Loraof (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed, although note that it is not that easy to say where modals end and other stuff begins. In the broad view taken by comparative linguists, everything that modulates how the verb "verbs its verbing" is a kind of modality, including moods and tenses - which in English have become so prevalent and important they warrant their own section in a grammar text. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:8D09:4400:3BA3:D50 (talk) 08:06, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

History
Is the form "used to" a fairly modern development? I can't remember it seeing it in Shakespeare or even 19th century literature. 2602:306:35CD:11C0:8463:65BF:52EF:6620 (talk) 03:32, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * In All's Well That Ends Well: Not, indeed: He hence removed last night and with more haste Than is his use. In Coriolanus we find: Whoever gave that counsel, to give forth The corn o' the storehouse gratis, as 'twas used Sometime in Greece,/... Come, leave your tears: a brief farewell: Where is your ancient courage? you were used To say extremity was the trier of spirits ... you were used to load me With precepts that would make invincible The heart that conn'd them. In Henry V: His eyes are humbler than they used to be.  In Passionate Pilgrim:  brook where Adon used to cool his spleen. In Pericles: He asks of you, that never used to beg. In Troilus and Cressida: To come as humbly as they used to creep To holy altars.2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:8D09:4400:3BA3:D50 (talk) 07:45, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Time restriction
"Last year we would go there frequently, but not simply We would go there frequently."

This is correct but could be misleading to learners of English. When a period in the past has been defined and established as topic, e.g. I have been talking about my childhood, then the second sentence could well occur naturally (a typical situation is in response to a question: When you lived in Prague did you visit the opera? - Oh yeah, we would...). We tend to use used to to emphasise the fact that the habitual action has been abandoned, although it might well have been continued to the present point in time, and would when the habitual action belongs to a period in our lives that is clearly separated from the present, in time but quite often also in space (when I was young; last year when I worked abroad, etc). 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:8D09:4400:3BA3:D50 (talk) 07:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Phrase and idiom
I quote:
 * The idiomatic phrase used to expresses past states or past habitual actions (usually with the implication that they are no longer so), as in I used to eat ice cream, or a state of accustomedness, as in I am used to eating ice cream or I am used to ice cream in a bowl. (These are in addition to the non-idiomatic combination of to use in the passive voice with an infinitive of purpose, as in A spoon is used to eat ice cream from a bowl.)

Two observations:

(i) Whether the to in used to is a subordinator or an extraordinarily defective verb, used to is not a phrase. (Used to eat ice cream is a phrase, and there are phrases within it, but used to is not among them.) Call it an "expression" if you like.

(ii) So used to, is a singular thing, whether a phrase (according to the writer) or just an expression, that "expresses past states or past habitual actions [...] as in I used to eat ice cream, or a state of accustomedness, as in I am used to eating ice cream or I am used to ice cream in a bowl." Uhh, no. Let's try adding very:


 * 1) *I very used to eat ice cream -- ungrammatical, because very doesn't modify verbs
 * 2) I am very used to eating ice cream -- grammatical, because very modifies adjectives
 * 3) I am very used to ice cream in a bowl -- grammatical, because very modifies adjectives

In the first of those three, used is a verb. In the second and third, it's an adjective. So used to as described here is not a single expression (let alone a single phrase).

Shall I rewrite this (and more), or would somebody else like to do so? -- Hoary (talk) 10:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)