May or might it be?

[Rachel Adams]

Would a native speaker use "may" or "might" instead of "could" and "can" in such situations as this one?

"The phone is ringing. May/might it be Tom?" Instead of "could/can it be Tom?"

 

[GoesStation]

Could it be Tom? is possible for me. None of the other options work.

 

[emsr2d2]

I would use only "Could it be Tom?" My grandfather, who was born in 1921, was fond of "Might it be ...?" but very few people of later generations use it.

 

[Rachel Adams]

I would use only "Could it be Tom?" My grandfather, who was born in 1921, was fond of "Might it be ...?" but very few people of later generations use it.

I read in "English Grammar in Context Advanced", "We use "can" or "could" when we ask questions about possibility. "Who can/could that be outside Mr. Smith's office?"
Isn't it the same situation? It's the book's example.

 

[5jj]

GS and emsr2d2 said they would use only could. I might use might - my language has a lot in common with emsr2d2's grandfather, even though I was born a quarter of a century later. I might also use could; can does not sound impossible to me. May sounds extremely unnatural to me.

 

[teechar]

I agree with 5jj. Whereas the others can work, "may" is highly unlikely. The only context I can think of in which it might work is if the speaker is wishing and hoping it is Tom who is calling.

 

[Rachel Adams]

GS and emsr2d2 said they would use only could. I might use might - my language has a lot in common with emsr2d2's grandfather, even though I was born a quarter of a century later. I might also use could; can does not sound impossible to me. May sounds extremely unnatural to me.

Isn't there a difference between "You could be right" and "You can be right" as there is between "Learning English can be difficult" (generally) and "Learning English could be difficult" ( In some cases?

 

[5jj]

Isn't there a difference between "You could be right" and "You can be right"

Yes. The first is natural; the second isn't.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I would use only "Could it be Tom?" My grandfather, who was born in 1921, was fond of "Might it be ...?" but very few people of later generations use it.

Yes. My dad used "might" a lot: "Might I trouble you for the butter?"

He was born in 1910.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I read in "English Grammar in Context Advanced", "We use "can" or "could" when we ask questions about possibility. "Who can/could that be outside Mr. Smith's office?"
Isn't it the same situation? It's the book's example.

Yes, it's the same situation.

CAN is fine, but COULD seems more natural to me. It means the same thing either way.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Isn't there a difference between "You could be right" and "You can be right" as there is between "Learning English can be difficult" (generally) and "Learning English could be difficult" ( In some cases)?

> I added ")" after "cases."

As complete sentences, only "You could be right" is natural.

As sentences fragments, which one is right depends on the context:

- You COULD be right, but I doubt it.

- You CAN be right some of the time but not all of the time.

In your examples about learning English, COULD is speculation, CAN is fact.

 

[Rachel Adams]

I agree with 5jj. Whereas the others can work, "may" is highly unlikely. The only context I can think of in which it might work is if the speaker is wishing and hoping it is Tom who is calling.

For example, in a statement, but not in a question. "May it be Tom." Right?

 

[Tarheel]

For example, in a statement, but not in a question. "May it be Tom?" Right?

Uh, no. That can only be a question. (I don't know what context that it would make sense in, if any.)

 

[Tarheel]

Would a native speaker use "may" or "might" instead of "could" and "can" in such situations as this one?

"The phone is ringing. May/might it be Tom?" Instead of "could/can it be Tom?"

It's before the advent of cell phones. The phone rings. Mabel is hoping Tom will call, but Marge answers the phone. Mabel says to Marge, "Is it Tom?"