Hi, Ahmed,

Both options are grammatically possible but "must" makes more sense: if the interlocutor had health problems, the speaker most probably recommended that she visit a doctor, and "could" does not convey that idea.

Ahmed.A.A posted:

Are there cases in which "must" has to be backshifted in reported speech?

What form do you propose to backshift "must"?

Hi,

Gustavo, Contributor posted:

Hi, Ahmed,

Both options are grammatically possible but "must" makes more sense: if the interlocutor had health problems, the speaker most probably recommended that she visit a doctor, and "could" does not convey that idea.

I agree with Gustavo's answer. If this question comes from an outside book, I think the model answer will be 'could', though. I'd like to put a little focus on the original sentence. We have two situations here:

1) She is ill and the speaker advises her to see a doctor. So, the original sentence would be: "You must go to a doctor if you have any health problems."

To change this statement into indirect speech, we have two possible cases: a) We report these words before her going to the doctor. That would be: he told her that she must go to a doctor if she has / had any health problems.

b) We report these words after her going to the doctor. That would be: He told her that she had to go to a doctor if she had any health problems.

2) She is pretending to be ill and asking to go to a doctor. If the speaker knows that reality, he would say: "You could go to a doctor if you had any health problems." In indirect speech, that would be: he told her that she could see a doctor if she had any health problems.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×