"Quasimodal" is a useful category since it denotes similarities and 
disparities. Grammaticalization as a concept can at least open the 
possibility that these constructions are on a path toward modal. We can 
also open up the possibility that grammar patterns exhibit some of the 
eccentricity (delicacy) we find routine in the lexicon.
     One key, I think, with "used to" is not just that it doesn't have a 
present tense alternative for its modal like meanings, but in a strict 
sense does not have a nonfinite form (in the same way that "have to"and 
"be able to" have.) "Use to" isn't fused and has a different meaning. 
The exception, I guess, might be in the negation examples we have been 
discussing. The argument for "didn't used to" could include the idea 
that "used to" has modalized sufficiently to have lost its nonfinite 
form. That usage shifts back and forth might mean it is still in process 
and has different status for different people.
     It's an interesting problem. I like the idea that most of us seem 
opposed to legislating this one way or the other.

Craig

On 6/15/2011 8:20 AM, Dick Veit wrote:
> True, Bob. "Used to" takes do-support and pure modals don't. "Used to" 
> (useta), along with "have to," "had to," and "ought to" (haveta, 
> hadda, oughtta), are often called "quasimodals" because they have some 
> characteristics of modals but not others.
>
> Unlike most other verbs that precede infinitives (want, try, like, 
> need, etc.), they can cannot be used or be analyzed for meaning 
> without the "to."
>
> 1. What did you want? We wanted to dance.
>
> But:
>
> 2. *What did you used? We used to dance.
> 3. *What do you have? We have to dance.
> 4. *What did you have? We had to dance.
> 5. *What do you ought? We ought to dance.
>
> Unlike other verbs (need, etc.), in quasimodals the verb and "to" are 
> largely, although not entirely, fused.
>
> 6. We need desperately to get work.
> 7. *We have desperately to get work.
>
> The modal "must" does not have a past tense, but the quasimodal "had 
> to" fills that void:
>
> 8. These days we must mind our manners.
> 9. In the past we had to mind our manners.
>
> Finally, in my region (southeastern North Carolina) some modals can be 
> used serially ("I might could do that"). That also works here with 
> "used to":
>
> 10. I used to could do that, but not any longer.
>
> Dick
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Robert Yates <[log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>     The problem with the analysis that "used to" is a modal is the
>     fact that
>     it takes do-support.
>
>     1) She used to play soccer.
>     2) She didn't used to play soccer.
>
>     3) She used to play soccer, didn't she?
>     4) She didn't used to play soccer, did she?
>
>     "would, "ought", "should" etc. never take do-support.
>
>     Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web 
> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select 
> "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>


To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/