Is the expression “we could might be able to […]” grammatically correct?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

I came across the expression “we could might be able to [...]” a few times (although it seems that this expression occurs very rarely).

Example #1 (source):

That adds about 7KB minified, and we could might be able to include it as an optional dependency

Example #2 (source):

If this is the actual problem, we could might be able to use 'cluster_host_map' to map the resource to the host-name.

Example #3 (source):

If we automatically had one context for each pipeline stage and an additional status for each failed job we could might be able to do that in a completely generic way.

Is this construction grammatically correct in English? If no, then why? If yes, then why would one choose to use it, and how is it different from “we could be able to [...]” or “we might be able to [...]”?

There exists a similar question, but it does not mention this particular expression, so I am asking this question to clarify the situation.

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

There is no such expression. Maybe you have seen 'We could/might be able to' where they have been suggested as alternatives?
– Kate Bunting
2 days ago

"That said, in this instance it looks like you could might be able to do it all via optional chaining in 1.1, depending on what your objects are:" stackoverflow.com/a/29365473/1002605 Not that I approve of it. Just for fun.
– Kris
2 days ago

"Also, you could might be able to use some of pandas indexing tricks to speed things up." stackoverflow.com/a/28949962/1002605 And tons more.
– Kris
2 days ago

1

I edited the question to include a few examples. But I don't understand what's wrong with this question. Is it off-topic on this site?
– lyrically wicked
2 days ago

@lyricallywicked I don’t think the question itself off-topic, but you should edit it to include your own research – that is, detail what makes you think it may (or may not) be grammatical, and what makes you unsure. Otherwise the question may be out on hold as lacking research.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago

add a comment |

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

I came across the expression “we could might be able to [...]” a few times (although it seems that this expression occurs very rarely).

Example #1 (source):

That adds about 7KB minified, and we could might be able to include it as an optional dependency

Example #2 (source):

If this is the actual problem, we could might be able to use 'cluster_host_map' to map the resource to the host-name.

Example #3 (source):

If we automatically had one context for each pipeline stage and an additional status for each failed job we could might be able to do that in a completely generic way.

There exists a similar question, but it does not mention this particular expression, so I am asking this question to clarify the situation.

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

There is no such expression. Maybe you have seen 'We could/might be able to' where they have been suggested as alternatives?
– Kate Bunting
2 days ago

"That said, in this instance it looks like you could might be able to do it all via optional chaining in 1.1, depending on what your objects are:" stackoverflow.com/a/29365473/1002605 Not that I approve of it. Just for fun.
– Kris
2 days ago

"Also, you could might be able to use some of pandas indexing tricks to speed things up." stackoverflow.com/a/28949962/1002605 And tons more.
– Kris
2 days ago

1

I edited the question to include a few examples. But I don't understand what's wrong with this question. Is it off-topic on this site?
– lyrically wicked
2 days ago

@lyricallywicked I don’t think the question itself off-topic, but you should edit it to include your own research – that is, detail what makes you think it may (or may not) be grammatical, and what makes you unsure. Otherwise the question may be out on hold as lacking research.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago

add a comment |

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

I came across the expression “we could might be able to [...]” a few times (although it seems that this expression occurs very rarely).

Example #1 (source):

That adds about 7KB minified, and we could might be able to include it as an optional dependency

Example #2 (source):

If this is the actual problem, we could might be able to use 'cluster_host_map' to map the resource to the host-name.

Example #3 (source):

If we automatically had one context for each pipeline stage and an additional status for each failed job we could might be able to do that in a completely generic way.

There exists a similar question, but it does not mention this particular expression, so I am asking this question to clarify the situation.

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

I came across the expression “we could might be able to [...]” a few times (although it seems that this expression occurs very rarely).

Example #1 (source):

That adds about 7KB minified, and we could might be able to include it as an optional dependency

Example #2 (source):

If this is the actual problem, we could might be able to use 'cluster_host_map' to map the resource to the host-name.

Example #3 (source):

If we automatically had one context for each pipeline stage and an additional status for each failed job we could might be able to do that in a completely generic way.

There exists a similar question, but it does not mention this particular expression, so I am asking this question to clarify the situation.

meaning grammaticality

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

edited 2 days ago

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

asked 2 days ago

lyrically wicked

1115

There is no such expression. Maybe you have seen 'We could/might be able to' where they have been suggested as alternatives?
– Kate Bunting
2 days ago

"That said, in this instance it looks like you could might be able to do it all via optional chaining in 1.1, depending on what your objects are:" stackoverflow.com/a/29365473/1002605 Not that I approve of it. Just for fun.
– Kris
2 days ago

"Also, you could might be able to use some of pandas indexing tricks to speed things up." stackoverflow.com/a/28949962/1002605 And tons more.
– Kris
2 days ago

1

I edited the question to include a few examples. But I don't understand what's wrong with this question. Is it off-topic on this site?
– lyrically wicked
2 days ago

@lyricallywicked I don’t think the question itself off-topic, but you should edit it to include your own research – that is, detail what makes you think it may (or may not) be grammatical, and what makes you unsure. Otherwise the question may be out on hold as lacking research.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago

add a comment |

There is no such expression. Maybe you have seen 'We could/might be able to' where they have been suggested as alternatives?
– Kate Bunting
2 days ago

"That said, in this instance it looks like you could might be able to do it all via optional chaining in 1.1, depending on what your objects are:" stackoverflow.com/a/29365473/1002605 Not that I approve of it. Just for fun.
– Kris
2 days ago

"Also, you could might be able to use some of pandas indexing tricks to speed things up." stackoverflow.com/a/28949962/1002605 And tons more.
– Kris
2 days ago

1

I edited the question to include a few examples. But I don't understand what's wrong with this question. Is it off-topic on this site?
– lyrically wicked
2 days ago

@lyricallywicked I don’t think the question itself off-topic, but you should edit it to include your own research – that is, detail what makes you think it may (or may not) be grammatical, and what makes you unsure. Otherwise the question may be out on hold as lacking research.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago

There is no such expression. Maybe you have seen 'We could/might be able to' where they have been suggested as alternatives?
– Kate Bunting
2 days ago

"That said, in this instance it looks like you could might be able to do it all via optional chaining in 1.1, depending on what your objects are:" stackoverflow.com/a/29365473/1002605 Not that I approve of it. Just for fun.
– Kris
2 days ago

"Also, you could might be able to use some of pandas indexing tricks to speed things up." stackoverflow.com/a/28949962/1002605 And tons more.
– Kris
2 days ago

I edited the question to include a few examples. But I don't understand what's wrong with this question. Is it off-topic on this site?
– lyrically wicked
2 days ago

@lyricallywicked I don’t think the question itself off-topic, but you should edit it to include your own research – that is, detail what makes you think it may (or may not) be grammatical, and what makes you unsure. Otherwise the question may be out on hold as lacking research.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago

add a comment |

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
1
down vote

All y'all, it's a southern thing, folks.

If Trump applies enough
pressure ($$$ and muscle), he
could might be able to get
Netanyahu and Abbas to sign a
deal
^{("Israel/Palestine: Is there still any hope for a two state solution?" Carleton University, May 30, 2018, pdf 6.09 MB)}

It's not acceptable in standard general English writing.

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

1

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

1

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

add a comment |

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});

}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473416%2fis-the-expression-we-could-might-be-able-to-grammatically-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
1
down vote

All y'all, it's a southern thing, folks.

If Trump applies enough
pressure ($$$ and muscle), he
could might be able to get
Netanyahu and Abbas to sign a
deal
^{("Israel/Palestine: Is there still any hope for a two state solution?" Carleton University, May 30, 2018, pdf 6.09 MB)}

It's not acceptable in standard general English writing.

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

1

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

1

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

add a comment |

up vote
1
down vote

All y'all, it's a southern thing, folks.

If Trump applies enough
pressure ($$$ and muscle), he
could might be able to get
Netanyahu and Abbas to sign a
deal
^{("Israel/Palestine: Is there still any hope for a two state solution?" Carleton University, May 30, 2018, pdf 6.09 MB)}

It's not acceptable in standard general English writing.

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

1

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

1

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

add a comment |

up vote
1
down vote

All y'all, it's a southern thing, folks.

If Trump applies enough
pressure ($$$ and muscle), he
could might be able to get
Netanyahu and Abbas to sign a
deal
^{("Israel/Palestine: Is there still any hope for a two state solution?" Carleton University, May 30, 2018, pdf 6.09 MB)}

It's not acceptable in standard general English writing.

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

All y'all, it's a southern thing, folks.

If Trump applies enough
pressure ($$$ and muscle), he
could might be able to get
Netanyahu and Abbas to sign a
deal
^{("Israel/Palestine: Is there still any hope for a two state solution?" Carleton University, May 30, 2018, pdf 6.09 MB)}

It's not acceptable in standard general English writing.

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

answered 2 days ago

Kris

32.3k541116

1

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

1

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

add a comment |

1

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

1

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

It is also very rare in southern speech, from what I've read about double modals and heard personally. It's an odd use of the double modal, since most instances of 'might' and 'could' together typically have 'might' coming first.
– eenbeetje
2 days ago

Might could is much more common than could might.
– John Lawler
2 days ago

@JohnLawler I had actually thought the might be could be a parenthetical: "... he could, might be, able to get ..." (... he could probably be able to get...) though still a multiple modal.
– Kris
19 hours ago

add a comment |

draft saved

draft discarded

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Cfxtrjtrk