I would like to share a very basic but interesting discussion about the usage of the modals “can” and “may,” a discussion that I thought might help arrest the marked decline in civility in our public and interpersonal communication in English. It was in reply to this question posed by Forum member Mylabskie sometime ago: “When should we use ‘may’ and ‘can’? When do we say ‘Can I go out?’ and ‘May I go out’?”
We use the modals “may” or “can” to express possibility, to denote the capacity to do something, or to express permission or ask for it. For this third purpose, our choice between “may” and “can” depends on the level of formality of the situation and on the social or professional rank or relative seniority between speaker and listener. As a general rule, “can” leans towards the informal side of saying things, and “may” towards the formal side.
IMAGE CREDIT: PEDIAA.COMAmong friends, for instance, it is expected and more natural to ask “
Can I go out?” than to ask “
May I go out?” To use the latter would draw quizzical looks from the listeners, as if the speaker came from Mars or somewhere else in time. Conversely, if the speaker is a student addressing a professor or someone much more senior in rank or age, it’s considered polite and proper to ask “
May I go out?” It would be rude—even uneducated-sounding—to ask “
Can I go out?”
If you are a brash lawyer, you might be even cited by a stern judge for contempt of court if you asked “
Can I see Your Honor in chambers?” instead of “
May I see Your Honor in chambers?” This is because in such situations, “can” becomes an improper, distasteful demand as opposed to “may,” which signifies a humble and deferential request.
This distinction between “can” and “may” is often not well understood and appreciated by nonnative speakers of English, for it can take years of social interaction in formal settings or social situations for them to understand the difference. In the interim, the wrong usage of those two modals could make nonnative English speakers unfairly looked upon as crass or uncouth by socially fastidious people.
Thankfully, the acquisition and acclimatization process for the proper usage of “can” and “may” can be greatly hastened by reading well-edited English-language publications and by enough exposure to linguistically well-attuned English-language movies and TV shows.
* * *
Here’s another question about language, this time from Forum member Miss Mae: “Since I got hooked into reading books, I would always take note of lessons that appeal to me and share it through a social networking site. In Janet Fitch’s novel
White Oleander, although I’m quite sure of the book’s message that I wanted to post, I’m not confident on how I should put it. Is the sentence ‘The best way to learn is
to live’ more appropriate than ‘The best way to learn is
through living’?”
My reply to Miss Mae:Yes, in the context of Janet Fitch’s novel, the construction “The best way to learn is
to live” captures your intended sense much better than “The best way to learn is
through living.” The second sentence, which uses “through living” as a noun complement, denotes the passive sense of just continuing to be alive, or just subsisting. By using the infinitive “to live,” in contrast, the first sentence denotes the active, more purposive sense of living a life rich in experience or, more idiomatically, “living it up.”
That latter sense, I’m sure, is much more in keeping with the plot of that novel, which is a coming-of-age story about a young girl separated from her mother and grows up in one foster home after another.
(Next:
The thorny choice between “whether it is” and “whether it be”) February 7, 2019
This essay, 1,129th of the series, appeared in the column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in the Campus Press section of the January 31, 2019 print edition of The Manila Times
, © 2019 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.
