Zach used to work at an independent record label. Negotiating could be exciting, but he was supposed to slant everything in the label’s favor. Some reps used questionable tactics. He couldn’t look at himself in the mirror if he treated people like that.
First Question:
In the above passage, how many phrasal modals are there?
I believe there are only two:
1) used to
2) was supposed to
I am wondering if "could be" is also a phrasal modal. I know that "could" is a modal, so does that mean "could be" is a phrasal modal?
Second Question:
In the above passage, the predicate of the first sentence is:
a) Zach
b) used
c) used to work
d) used to work at an independent record label
I believe the answer is "d", because my understanding of a predicate is that it is a verb and all objects and modifiers that go with it. I think that "used to work" makes up the verb and "at an independent record label" are the modifiers
Which of the following will help Lana with her concern?
First of all, great job identifying the two phrasal modals in the passage: "used to" and "was supposed to." They both express a sense of obligation or duty. However, "could be" is not considered a phrasal modal in this context. "Could" is a modal verb expressing possibility or ability, and "be" is the main verb in this case.
Now, moving on to the second question about the predicate of the first sentence. You are correct in understanding that the predicate of a sentence includes the verb along with any objects and modifiers. In this case, the predicate of the first sentence is "used to work at an independent record label." So, the correct answer is indeed "d) used to work at an independent record label."
Nice job analyzing the passage and breaking down the elements of grammar within it! If you have any further questions or need clarification, feel free to ask.