It is said that can and may both are used as a sense of possibility.
If that’s the case, then what is the difference between:
It can be very dangerous to cycle at night.
It may be very dangerous to cycle at night.
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,362 times
0
-
2Not much difference between those two; either could be used in almost any circumstances with the same sense. But all modal verbs have several senses and peculiar syntax, and the usages of can and may are very different. – John Lawler Aug 01 '15 at 19:03
-
In that context there is very little difference. In other contexts the difference between can and may is quite significant. – Hot Licks Aug 01 '15 at 20:41
-
"Can I eat the last cookie?" "Yes you can." (It's physically possible to eat it.) "May I eat the last cookie?" "No you may not." (You'll ruin your supper.) – Hot Licks Aug 01 '15 at 20:43
-
In addition, might or could seem to work equally well. Frustrating, isn't it, when you've been taught that each of these is different! – Brian Hitchcock Aug 02 '15 at 12:02
3 Answers
3
It can be very dangerous to cycle in the night.
This indicates that there are certain circumstances that make it dangerous, e.g.
It can be very dangerous to cycle in the night, for example: if you are cycling without any lights, if you are cycling through a rough area, if you are cycling after a night at the pub.
It may be very dangerous to cycle in the night.
This indicates uncertainty.
It may be very dangerous to cycle in the night but I'm not sure - it may be perfectly safe.
chasly - supports Monica
- 37,215
-
if 'can' is used then does it mean that it is 100% dangerous to cycle in the city ? – iamRR Aug 01 '15 at 19:20
-
-
I would compare it to "It can't be true"/"it may not be true" or "He can be sarcastic"/"He may be sarcastic". – Centaurus Aug 01 '15 at 20:47
-
1@iamRR - No, it means that it's dangerous under those particular circumstances. They might not always apply. – chasly - supports Monica Aug 01 '15 at 22:16
-
-
Clarifying the idea from @chaslyfromUK, the 'can' sentence means that sometimes it is dangerous, but not always. – aparente001 Aug 02 '15 at 04:27
-
@chaslyfromUK -- As aparente001 says 'can' means it is sometimes dangerous, but not always. So if the sentence is 'It can be very cold in winter'. Since 'can' expresses uncertainty so does it mean that there are some chances that there may be no cold in winter ? – iamRR Oct 07 '15 at 05:17
0
Most English speakers do not pay attention to the the subtleties between these words and treat them like synonyms. In this context, I believe it is more appropriate than some others, since they can both just mean possibly in their own ways. Can is a little more indirect in that meaning, whereas may is more direct but imprecise because it can also note permission. However if you want to read deeply enough into it there might be some arcane distinction.
Probable understanding: It is able to be dangerous. This ability does not have to be exercised, indicating it might not be dangerous but it is nevertheless possible.
Unlikely implication: It might optionally imply the night is known to haves the means establish to be dangerous, such as its own darkness, which makes it hard to operate your bicycle safely.
Probable understanding: It might be dangerous in the sense of there is a chance it is, rather than strength. It is possible but not ascertained.
Unlikely implication: Using this instead of can might indicates you do not know if there are circumstances which could make it dangerous, like thugs or nocturnal monsters taking cover under darkness are actually there. It might be dangerous, if circumstances permit it to be.
Sometimes we might use what is considered the past tense of can, could, when discussing hypothetical ability similar to how we might use would as a hypothetical will. In this case, it seems as if either is appropriate. "I would go, if I could." demonstrates future tense use of both words.
If the author wanted to signify that riding the bicycle at night is certainly dangerous, what probably should have have been written is "It is very dangerous to cycle in the night". There would be no need to modify the substantive verb, noting the existence of danger, with an auxiliary verb and doing so may actually be detrimental to comprehensibility
Definitions of can, may, could, would, is, substantive and auxiliary which are used as external reference material are all found in the Hallen, Cynthia, ed. Renovated Online Edition of Noah Webster’s 1844 American Dictionary of the English Language, http://edl.byu.edu/index.php .
Tonepoet
- 4,541
-4
There is no difference. From the OED
Can [B. II. With infinitive, as auxiliary of predication] 5. Expressing a possible contingency; = May
possibly
deadrat
- 44,678
-
Lovely. Another drive-by downvote. I would be happy to express your reservations to www.oed.com if I only knew what they were. – deadrat Aug 01 '15 at 21:14
-
1I didn't vote against the answer myself but since you seem befuddled I'll posit a hopefully helpful hypothesis: You did not contrast the referenced definition of may, against a definition of can to actually demonstrate the perceived differences or more accurately in this case, the lack of a difference. – Tonepoet Aug 01 '15 at 21:59
-
@Tonepoet I am not befuddled, because there is nothing in a drive-by downvote to be confused about. There's nothing. Which is why DBDVs are a curse upon this forum. Thank you for your hypothesis, which made me realize that I had omitted the head word "can,"which" I have supplied. I needed to make explicit what was only implied, namely that this is a definition of "can" as a synonym of "may." Do you, yourself find a need for more contrast, or is this a need you impute to others? – deadrat Aug 01 '15 at 23:35
-
Now with the fix, the answer seems fine to me since it is a self-contained analysis of both words in the sense that applies from a respectable source. There's only so much you can do to contrast the same shade of grey. I guess my hypothesis was wrong though, since this was voted against again. I'm not entirely sure why this received another nay vote. – Tonepoet Aug 02 '15 at 00:37
-
Can can be synonymous with may. It is not always synonymous with may. There is a difference. – abcd Aug 02 '15 at 01:30
-
Or did you mean "Can may be synonymous with may"? It's not always, that's true. In particular, the negations of the sentences aren't equivalent. But all the speculations about the supposed differences in meaning between the originals are unsourced opinion. In this usage, as the OED says: Can = May. You might arrive safely on your bike or you might get run over. I've added the OED's category of usage to make it clear that the definition applies to the example. – deadrat Aug 02 '15 at 02:17
-
-
2My answer might be more speculative but Noah Webster's A.D.E.L. is a citable source, isn't it? I just didn't want to quote it verbatim this time. Anyway I think what he takes issue with is the word possibly based upon that but in analyzing this definition I personally take that to mean that to mean, is that while the words share this one sense, they differ in other contexts. Maybe an explanation as to why this sense applies over the others might be useful in that regard . – Tonepoet Aug 02 '15 at 04:21
-
-
My eh? was actually directed at the third DBDVer. The comment by @Tonepoet is a little obscure, but if I understand it correctly, it's a valid point: Sometimes the meanings of the two words differ, and sometimes they're identical. My answer provides sufficient evidence for the latter possibility but not the necessity. – deadrat Aug 02 '15 at 05:41
-
@chaslyfromUK shows that can and may imply different things even in this context. And in my comment, I said "can can be synonymous" for a reason. "May" would've been inapt. – abcd Aug 02 '15 at 22:38
-
@dbliss As much as I respect chaslyfromUK he hasn't shown anything. He's maintained that there's a difference that's unsupported by the gold standard, the OED. I could be convinced that the OED is wrong or thatI've misread it, but it would take evidence beyond assertion. And, no, "may' wouldn't have been an inapt substitution in your sentence. Both words indicate possibility. – deadrat Aug 02 '15 at 23:47
-
@deadrat chaslyfromUK's answer is supported by the OED. One definition for "can" is "has the ability to": as in, "The word 'can' has the ability to [i.e., can] be different from the word 'may' -- for example, in this context . . ." There is no such definition for "may." The fact that "can" and "may" share one definition -- expressing possibility -- does not mean they are synonyms in all contexts or in this context. – abcd Aug 03 '15 at 00:34
-
@dbliss Only people have abilities and intentionality, and I agree that there's a difference between a person saying "I can lift 100 pounds" and "I may lift 100 pounds." To impute abilities to inanimate objects or abstractions is simply figurative speech that indicates situational possibility. The claim is that native speakers will discern a difference between "can" and "may" when considering the dangers of a nocturnal bike ride. I don't believe that's the case, and I'd like to have some evidence before I change my mind. – deadrat Aug 03 '15 at 00:54
-
@deadrat all you need is evidence that native speakers will discern a difference between "can" and "may" in that sentence? i am a native speaker. i discern a difference. bam. "to impute ability to . . . abstractions . . . simply . . . indicates situational possibility." what is your evidence for that? – abcd Aug 03 '15 at 04:14
-
-
Great. Another drive-by down-vote. Three weeks after the last activity! It doesn't matter how you vote. The examples given mean exactly the same thing. That's because in this and other contexts "can" and "may" are synonyms. Not in every context. But in this one. – deadrat Aug 26 '15 at 02:54
