Used to and would

Question

Is the verb "work" a state? For example, the sentence "I used to work as a doctor." is grammatically correct but is "I would work as a doctor." also correct? It doesn't sound weird, is it because it is used as unreal present? The sentence "He would work from 4 am to 7 pm when he was an accountant." is grammatically correct, so does that mean the verb "work" becomes dynamic when it is used in that sentence? Someone please explain, I'm confused.

Answer 1

USED TO conveys an idea of 'relative permanence and continuity' which WOULD does not in my view.

"I used to work as a doctor and she would call me to ask for advice (often/sometimes/at regular intervals/occasionally, ie with such frequency as to make me remember her action as somewhat repeated, not necessarily permanent or routinary).

I also conceive of the sentence above as implying 'I don't work as a doctor any longer', an element that I regard as essential when it comes to choosing 'USED TO' as opposed to the merely descriptive 'PAST CONTINUOUS').

"I used to work as a doctor" at the time and "she was working" as a shop assistant in a hardware shop in the nearby village (I don't know whether she changed job at some point because I lost track of her years ago)

E&OE, do correct me if you think I'm wrong (I'm not a native speaker/writer)

Answer 2

Work is not a stative verb.

Furthermore I wouldn’t find the the two sentences synonymous. While both express you worked as a doctor, the latter seems to be emphasizing you only occasionally worked as a doctor. Or depending on context it would be confused with the unreal future.

As a side note it is “use to” not “used to” in that context.

Answer 3

Both the sentences are different

Firstly "used to" and "would" are different.

There are 2 meanings of used to which depends on what u want to tell. Like "I'm used to it", where used means accustomed to.

"I used to go to the beach with my grandparents" where used means something you did repeatedly in the past, but not now.

Whereas 'would' is a modal verb with is commonly used to create conditional verb forms. It serves as the past form of will and it indicates repetition in the past. it also express a polite request.

Answer 4

'Used to' covers both continuous/progressive, and iterative, past and no longer extant situations:

We use used to when we refer to things in the past which are no longer true. It can refer to repeated actions or to a state or situation:

• That white house over there used to belong to my family. (It belonged to my family in the past, but not any more.) [continuous aspect]

• He used to play football for the local team, but he’s too old now.

• [She used to go fishing most weekends.] [iterative]

[Cambridge Dictionary; modified]

'Would' only covers iterative past actions (and there is sometimes a connotation of willingness and/or geniality, perhaps via 'polite would'. But sometimes, there is more than a hint of exasperation: He would keep wiping his nose on his shirt sleeve. Here, 'would' is emphasised in speech.)

We use would to refer to typical habitual actions and events in the past. This is usually a formal use and it often occurs in stories (narratives):

• I had a friend from Albany, which is about 36 miles away, and we would meet every Thursday morning and she would help us.

• Then he would wash; then he would eat his toast; then he would read his paper by the bright burning fire of electric coals.

[again, Cambridge Dictionary]

OP doesn't have the best terminology and analysis here.

So 'I would work as a doctor' is improbable, though possible in such iterative contexts as

• She would work as a doctor during the week, and help her father with the farm at weekends.