0

Can someone help me to understand why we use "Could' in this sentence instead of 'can'.

"GST could make some products cost less" vs "GST can make some products cost less"

Thanks

closed as off-topic by SGR, phoog, Edwin Ashworth, NVZ, Chenmunka Aug 4 '16 at 13:41

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    "Could" is used to indicate a possibility. So GSTmay very well make some products cost less, but it may also not. – MorganFR Aug 3 '16 at 9:01
  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_subjunctive: "would, should, could and might can in some contexts be regarded as past subjunctives of will, shall, can and may respectively. (They may also be described simply as the past forms of the latter modals, or as modals or auxiliaries in their own right.)" – phoog Aug 3 '16 at 9:03
  • can we not use "Can" to refer the 'Possibility'? – santhosha Aug 3 '16 at 9:22
  • I'd argue that 'can' strengthens the possibility, without actual introducing a guarantee. 'I can attend the meeting' - I intend to appear if confirmed, or 'I could attend the meeting' - you are going to have to tell me you really want me there. – Cato Aug 3 '16 at 10:28
2

The difference seems to be in whether positivity or negativity is being implied. So a shop worker will often say 'Yes I can provide you with free box for that'. They might also say 'I could provide you with a box, but it isn't quite suitable.'

So 'could' seems to imply to me that they aren't going to carry out the act.

In the future you might find yourself saying.

'GST could have made some products cost less' (but they never did that)

OR in the case of your second (more positive sentence)

'GST have made some products cost less' (they did do that)

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.