Would vs. Used To
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
Would vs. Used To
Observant writers and grammarians see words as more than letters and syllables that help to form an idea. We view them as paring knives and brush strokes that define and shape thoughts that connect with other people.
For that reason, we pay close attention to word choices and their nuances. Common speech sometimes switches certain words to mean the same things. In thoughtful writing, however, we understand the differences and apply them for more-exact meanings.
Would and used to are a pair that can sometimes confuse in referring to past actions that are now concluded. They tend to be swapped freely when in certain contexts they should maintain separate duties. The following guidelines will help distinguish them.
1. Would should be used only if the past time frame is established up front. Used to does not require this.
Examples
Grammatical: We used to go to the movies every Saturday when I was a kid back in the ’70s.
Not grammatical: We would go to the movies every Saturday when I was a kid back in the ’70s.
Note the difference in the second sentence if we introduce the time early on:
Grammatical: When I was a kid back in the ’70s, we would go to the movies every Saturday.
By starting the sentence in the past, we set up the grammatical inclusion of would.
2. Would is not used with stative verbs, i.e., those that describe a state (e.g., feel, love, know) rather than an activity (e.g., run, jump, write).
Examples
Grammatical: When I worked at the arena, I used to know the booking agent who could get backstage VIP passes for me and my friends.
Not grammatical: When I worked at the arena, I would know the booking agent who could get backstage VIP passes for me and my friends.
3. Used to describes a past state in a simple, declarative statement, where would grammatically would not function.
Examples
Grammatical in the past tense: I used to be a football running back.
Not grammatical in the past tense: I would be a football running back.Grammatical in the past tense: She used to lead the company as its CEO.
Not grammatical in the past tense: She would lead the company as its CEO.
Attention to subtleties differentiates careful writers from casual ones. Understanding when and how to apply would and used to further shows your mastery of English in composing crisp and meaningful content.
Pop Quiz
Choose the grammatical use of would or used to in the following sentences.
1. When he was a supervisor at his last job, he (would / used to) close the warehouse at 6 p.m. sharp.
2. We (would / used to) play hopscotch every day during the summer.
3. Call me crazy, but when I was in college I (would / used to) love to write the longest papers in all of my classes.
4. Work (would / used to) get so busy that we (would / used to) skip lunch at least twice a week.
Pop Quiz Answers
1. When he was a supervisor at his last job, he would close the warehouse at 6 p.m. sharp.
2. We used to play hopscotch every day during the summer.
3. Call me crazy, but when I was in college I used to love to write the longest papers in all of my classes.
4. Work used to get so busy that we would skip lunch at least twice a week.
If the article or the existing discussions do not address a thought or question you have on the subject, please use the "Comment" box at the bottom of this page.
Is it possible to use used to in the last case?
As illustrated in the article’s first point, used to establishes the past time frame up front; this then prompts the grammatical inclusion of would in the relative subordinate clause that follows. Repeating used to in the sentence would be grammatically awkward because it would establish a past time frame twice in the same way. We assume you are referring to the final Pop Quiz question.
Shouldn’t this be “my friends and me” in the set of examples under No. 2?
It’s a matter of writer’s preference. Some writers may feel that mentioning “my friends” first would convey a sense of courtesy, but no guideline or rule governs that word order. Both “my friends and me” and “me and my friends” are grammatically accurate as objects of the preposition “for.”
Is it grammatically correct to use “would” in negative statements?
For example, I did not use to walk my dog every day.
I wouldn’t walk my dog every day.
Thank you!
Since the past time frame is not established up front in your example sentence, “I did not used to walk my dog every day” is the better format for describing the past.
You might also consider the context of each sentence option. The first sentence suggests something habitual in the past without a particular thought or attitude behind it: I did not used to walk my dog every day. Now I do. The second suggests an intent or will behind not walking the dog in the present: You walk your dog every day? I wouldn’t walk my dog every day.
Question: In class he ____ ask some silly questions, and his classmates ____ laugh at him.
I learned the grammatically correct sentence you mentioned—”Work used to get so busy that we would skip lunch at least twice a week”—so I say “In class he used to ask some silly questions, and his classmates would laugh at him” is correct. Am I right? Can we use “used to” and “would” interchangeably in the sentence？
The sentence “In class he used to ask some silly questions, and his classmates would laugh at him” is grammatically correct. “Used to” and “would” are not interchangeable in the sentence.
This article states that “Would should be used only if the past time frame is established up front.” Is it acceptable to use would in a context that does not describe the past in some way? For example, can you state “I would love to catch up with you” to imply that you want to spend time with someone in the future?
Yes, the word “would” in your sentence is used as an auxiliary verb and is grammatically correct. See our post What Are Auxiliary Verbs? (Including Examples and Usage).
Great explanation and examples. Thanks.
When I worked at the arena, I used to know the booking agent who could get backstage VIP passes for me and my friends.
This sentence structure sounds awkward; I would use the simple past tense instead: When I worked at the arena, I knew the agent. Is my thinking wrong? If so, why?
I am also interested in the logic of using would vs. used to. In the first two examples under point 1, why is it correct to use used to but not would? I can learn the rote rule, but I like to understand the why. I presume it has to do with a conditional, but I can’t put my finger on it, and “By starting the sentence in the past, we set up the grammatical inclusion of would,” doesn’t quite explain. Thank you.
The sentence in question identifies a past state in which the exact timing of having known the booking agent is not clarified. For example, the speaker in the sentence could have known the booking agent for one year and then the booking agent may have left for another job. The inclusion of “used to” leaves the past description more open-ended. At the same time, depending on the writer’s intent and concern about exactness and brevity, writing “I knew the agent” would be a more succinct way of expressing the same thought.
You are on the right track about the logic behind differentiating “used to” and “would” in the first example. The word “would” is an auxiliary verb often used in the conditional tense, which describes unreal or hypothetical situations that involve an “if” idea. If we do not establish the past time frame up front, we prepare the reader or listener to anticipate a conditional statement. Conversely, if we do start with the past time frame, we prepare the receiving eye or ear for information that was a repeated pattern in the past. This is an example of a nuance that supports clearer communication.
In the first sentence, “When he was a supervisor at his last job, he would close the warehouse at 6 p.m. sharp,” it is acceptable to replace “would” with “used to”？ The sentence describes a past habit.
As the post discusses, because the sentence begins with a dependent clause in the past tense, it sets up the grammatical inclusion of “would”: When he was a supervisor at his last job, he would close the warehouse at 6 p.m. sharp.
If the order is switched (i.e., independent clause first), the sentence could be expressed as “he used to close the warehouse at 6 p.m. sharp when he was a supervisor at his last job.”
Is it correct that I can use stative verbs with “would” if they denote an action?
E.g.: He would always have breakfast at 7.a.m.
The dog would always smell the food first.
Stative verbs do not denote actions in any context. In addition, as the post states, would should be used only if the past time frame is established up front: e.g., When I had breakfast as a boy, the dog would always smell the food first. Otherwise, we would write the same sentence as The dog used to always smell the food first.
Very good and useful explanation. However, there is something calling my attention: in N°3, the reason why “would” grammatically would not function seems to be that the verbs in those phrases you give as examples are stative verbs; and you said in N°2 that “would” is not used with stative verbs. Can you provide any examples in N°3 with non stative verbs? Thank you.
The second example sentence contains a non-stative verb (lead). Stative verbs do not denote actions in any context.
She used to lead the company as its CEO.