German Question

[ajaxfetish]

Future - passive - modal.

Sorry, I realize I may have caused some confusion with this. I'm talking about the sentence's structural hierarchy. This isn't the same as its linear order. From front to back, you get future auxiliary, main verb, passive auxiliary, modal auxiliary. From top to bottom, however, you get future auxiliary, modal auxiliary, passive auxiliary, main verb. This is because in the latest syntactic theory, German verbal phrases are head-right instead of head left. I diagrammed the sentence to illustrate: WARNING!! Spoiler Contains Syntax!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

So when I talk about higher in the structure, I consider the conjugated verb highest, and then count down from the end of the sentence to the main verb. It's easier in subordinate clauses, because then it's all just a right to left deal. (I've not addressed it in the tree, but it's possible the future auxiliary begins in a future-specific phrase and is raised to T before being raised to C)

You mean können and müssen? Ich werde Englisch können müssen. I will have to dominate English. Endlich wieder müssen können. Finally being able to pee again. But I agree these ain't real modals.

Right. It looks like one of them's being used as the main verb in each sentence. It is possible to have languages with double modals (some southern American dialects allow double modals such as might could.

Ever tried these?
http://forum.wordreference.com/index.php
Grammar nazis a big part ...

http://www.babelboard.de/forum.php
A very dedicated, yet small germanophone community. I know there is somebody who will defnitely discuss that matter in English with you.

I haven't, but that may be a good resource for getting more native speaker intuitions. I'll look into it. Thanks.

Ajax

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Sorry, I realize I may have caused some confusion with this. I'm talking about the sentence's structural hierarchy. This isn't the same as its linear order. From front to back, you get future auxiliary, main verb, passive auxiliary, modal auxiliary. From top to bottom, however, you get future auxiliary, modal auxiliary, passive auxiliary, main verb. This is because in the latest syntactic theory, German verbal phrases are head-right instead of head left. I diagrammed the sentence to illustrate: WARNING!! Spoiler Contains Syntax!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

So when I talk about higher in the structure, I consider the conjugated verb highest, and then count down from the end of the sentence to the main verb. It's easier in subordinate clauses, because then it's all just a right to left deal. (I've not addressed it in the tree, but it's possible the future auxiliary begins in a future-specific phrase and is raised to T before being raised to C)

You've put really a lot of effort into it. As a native speaker I never took care of this. I'm sorry but I don't feel like I could help you anymore now at this point.

Right. It looks like one of them's being used as the main verb in each sentence. It is possible to have languages with double modals (some southern American dialects allow double modals such as might could.

What about ...
Sie sind so nah, sie müssten sich berühren können.
Würden Sie sich beherrschen können, wenn man Ihnen dies vorwirft? (the latter spoken only)

[ajaxfetish]

What about ...
Sie sind so nah, sie müssten sich berühren können.
Würden Sie sich beherrschen können, wenn man Ihnen dies vorwirft? (the latter spoken only)

The first looks a lot like a double modal. How would it best be translated into English? "They are so near, they must be touchable"? The only modal I recognize as such in the second is können. Would you categorize würden along with the modals? What would be the difference between Würden Sie sich beherrschen können and Könnten Sie sich beherrschen?

Ajax

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Regarding sentence no. 1: They are so near, they should be almost in range for touching each other.

Regarding sentence no. 2: Könnten Sie sich beherrschen and Würden Sie sich beherrschen können are equal in what they express. The first könnten is Konjunktiv II, while the other would be the Ersatzform. So, I guess it's not a modal ...

The second sentence I labelled "spoken only" because it's really bad. In a book, the sentence would be Könnten Sie sich beherrschen, wenn man Ihnen dies vorwerfen würde / vorwürfe? Lamentably, the Konjunktiv II is loosing ground and gives in to the Ersatzform. You receive strange looks when you use the strong forms of the verbs apart from the obvious ever fitting würde, könnte, möchte, ginge, täte, hätte, wollte.

Wollten Sie das machen müssen? Das möchte ich niemals machen müssen. Would you like to be forced to do that? I'd never ever want to have to do that. If wollen is a modal verb, but I think this could be the case.