English translation: 1) habitual: used to 2) "future in the past": was to
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:
would (to indicate past tense)
English translation:
1) habitual: used to 2) "future in the past": was to
English to English translations [PRO] Art/Literary - Linguistics
English term or phrase:would
I just want to know how best to explain the use of "would" to indicate the past tense. I understand it, it makes sense to me, I may use it myself, but how do you best explain it to someone who's wondering why not use the simple past tense or "used to"?
Example 1:
The King would often visit Mahaghiri to take her some special tit-bit to eat and check that Rajinder was looking after her properly. But Rajinder needed no reminding, for he also loved the elephant dearly, and trusted her completely. Every morning, he would take her down to the river for her bath. Then he would bring her freshly cut grass, leaves and the finest fruits he could find in the market for her breakfast. During the day, he would talk to her and, in the evening, he would play his flute to send her to sleep.
Example 2 (different usage, I think):
Young Eric attended St Cyprian's on a scholarship that allowed his parents to pay only half of the usual fees. Many years later, he would recall his time at St Cyprian's with biting resentment in the essay ....
I'm thinking in the second example it's the idea of "used to" that "would" is expressing here, but I can't quite put my finger on why "would" is used here rather than the simple past tense. Is it the sudden jump in time frame?
Explanation: As Melanie's reference explains, "would" used for referring to past habits goes back a long way. Although both forms were in use when America was first settled, it seems that the early settlers preferred this older form and continued to use it. The British, perhaps due to their dealings with their French neighbours, favoured "used to".
Nowadays, I believe both forms are in use in both variants, but with the preferences stated above. So, past habits can use either (e.g. He used to swim a lot ; he would swim a lot). Note that in informal British English writing, we often start with "used to" then switch (e.g. We used to swim every day. We'd rush to the pool, then we'd undress ...)
Differences are that:
- "used to" can also be used to describe past states and possessions (e.g. I used to be a waiter; he used to have a beard). "Would" would be incorrect.
- "would" is often preferred for personal attitudes and behaviour (e.g. as he grew older, he would often talk about the war) "Used to" is not incorrect, though. I believe this is the reason I (a Brit) am perfectly happy with your second example.
The simple past can also be used to describe past habits, so sometimes there are three valid alternatives, as in the following example given in Longman English Grammar:
When I worked on a farm, I always used to get up at 5 a.m.
When I worked on a farm, I would always get up at 5 a.m.
When I worked on a farm, I always got up at 5 a.m.
So, in your first example, I believe that all three would be acceptable.
Hope that has helped to clarify rather than muddy the waters!
is used a lot in narratives for repeated or habitual actions, where "used to" would sound more like a plain statement of fact - especially in your 1st example
By the way just noticed that when I wrote "I'm thinking in the second example it's the idea of "used to" that "would" is expressing here" I actually meant to say "it's NOT the idea of used to"..... doesn't make much difference now but I really was aware that the second example is different! :-)
Thanks Sheila, Melanie, Barbara and Tony for the insights on both usages. Thanks Sheila for pointing out the differences between the usage of "used to" and "would". Your second point especially is I think confirmed by Barbara's comment on how "would" can express nostalgia for and fond memories of times past. I think there's definitely a nuance there.
Your second example is not the same, it's not the 'habitual past' (= was in the habit of doing), but in fact a 'future-in-the-past' (= we now know with hindsight that he was going to do this in the future, with respect to the presnet back then in the past!)
I think that this use of "would" is connected with the fact that the action occurs after Eric's time at St Cyprian's, so it is a projection into the future from active time of the first sentence, but it is in the past from the point of view of the narrator.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
1 hr confidence: peer agreement (net): +3
"would" and "used to" are often interchangeable
Explanation: As Melanie's reference explains, "would" used for referring to past habits goes back a long way. Although both forms were in use when America was first settled, it seems that the early settlers preferred this older form and continued to use it. The British, perhaps due to their dealings with their French neighbours, favoured "used to".
Nowadays, I believe both forms are in use in both variants, but with the preferences stated above. So, past habits can use either (e.g. He used to swim a lot ; he would swim a lot). Note that in informal British English writing, we often start with "used to" then switch (e.g. We used to swim every day. We'd rush to the pool, then we'd undress ...)
Differences are that:
- "used to" can also be used to describe past states and possessions (e.g. I used to be a waiter; he used to have a beard). "Would" would be incorrect.
- "would" is often preferred for personal attitudes and behaviour (e.g. as he grew older, he would often talk about the war) "Used to" is not incorrect, though. I believe this is the reason I (a Brit) am perfectly happy with your second example.
The simple past can also be used to describe past habits, so sometimes there are three valid alternatives, as in the following example given in Longman English Grammar:
When I worked on a farm, I always used to get up at 5 a.m.
When I worked on a farm, I would always get up at 5 a.m.
When I worked on a farm, I always got up at 5 a.m.
So, in your first example, I believe that all three would be acceptable.
Hope that has helped to clarify rather than muddy the waters!
Sheila Wilson Spain Local time: 02:18 Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 27
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +3