# יכולתי / הייתי יכול



## Yannick10

Hello, 

- They told me that when using the verb יכול in the past tense, we should put the verb to be, just like the use of the verb צריך. For example: הייתי צריך לבוא אליך or לא הייתי יכול לנשום. But I've just seen the form יכולתי and I'd like to know what the nuance between those two forms is.

Thank you in advance!


----------



## bazq

I normally refrain from using the word "tense" in regard to Hebrew since I don't believe Modern Hebrew's verbal system is strictly tense-based, but יכול definitely has past forms:
יכולתי
יכולת יכולת [yaxolta    yaxolt]
יכולנו
יכל יכלה  *  [yaxal       yaxla]
יכולתם יכולתן
יכלו

*These are colloquial forms which are indeed interchangeable with "היה יכול" and "הייתה יכולה" to convey a simple past action, but only them. Other than that, all uses of "היה + יכול" convey an unreal past event that did not occur. This is similar to English "could have..." and French "j'*aurais pu*" (t'*aurais pu*, il *aurait pu*...).


----------



## slus

The only thing that's different about יכול is that the singular-male-past tense is exactly the same as the singular-male-persent tense - both are יכול.
(Bazq, יכל is a common mistake)
Therefore people tend to add יכול היה when it's in the past, just to differentiate.
All other specific past forms exist, including יכולתי and יכלה.


----------



## Drink

I don't get why it's a problem that the 3rd-person singular masculine past tense is the same as the masculine singular present tense. The same is true for most nif'al verbs (although the nikkud is slightly different), so why isn't it a problem there?


----------



## slus

It's not a real problem, you don't really HAVE to add היה, but it seems that while with most nifal verbs the context makes it clear whether it's present or future, with יכול it's more confusing.


----------



## bazq

I fear someone will get the impression from this thread that native speakers somehow accept 3rd person singular יכול as a past form - they 100% do not. They either add היה, or they say יכל (which as I said is a colloquial form. Considering it as a "mistake" is matter of opinion).


----------



## slus

It's a mistake in the sense that it is not a part of the standard language. It is a very common mistake, but so is "eser shekel" or gerev yafa".


----------



## עקיבא7

Wait, so, do native speakers for masculine third person singular only say היה יכול, but for the rest of the עבר forms the regular conjugations of יכולתי, יכולנו, etc.?


----------



## slus

Not really. Most native speakers ignore this [silly] rule when speaking. But it is so in books.


----------

