|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shanth_phy
#44364 Sat, 04 Sep 04 06:57 AM
|
|
Hi,
I'm sorry if all this has been already discussed, but I couldn't find an exact answer to my question anywhere. I hope you will bear with me. My question is what are the semantic differences between the usage of shall and will in first, second and third person? Especially what should be used in (official/formal) sentences like: The council shall/will appoint a moderator to moderate moderately modearate moderation activities.
Thanks in advance.
Awaiting, illuminating replies
Shanth
``Quidquid latine dictum, altum viditur''
|
|
|
|
|
Joined on
Sat, Sep 4 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mister Micawber
#44445 Sun, 05 Sep 04 12:55 PM
|
|
Hi Shanth,
Welcome to English Forums.
This subject is a can of worms, and nobody wants to touch it, because opinions are sure to differ. One thing reasonably certain is that 'shall' is fading away, and about the only place you'll see it is in first person questions ('Shall we adjourn?', 'Shall I get the tea?') and in formal or legal written statements like the one you have presented:
'The council shall appoint a moderator to moderate activities.'
|
|
|
|
|
Joined on
Wed, Aug 4 2004
Yokohama
|
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shanth_phy
#44480 Sun, 05 Sep 04 08:49 PM
|
|
Thanks for your quick reply.
I do suppose that the distinction is slightly fuzzy.
Shanth
``Quidquid latine dictum, altum viditur''
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sunilbhasin
#44621 Tue, 07 Sep 04 03:26 PM
|
|
Dear Shanth,
The distinction is very clear.
SHALL means SHOULD and WILL means WOULD and CAN means COULD.
SHALL is mandatory; something which should be done. Taking your example, "The council SHALL appoint a moderator..." means that it is incumbent upon the council to appoint a moderator and if it does not do so, it is guilty.
WILL is something which is expected, though not compulsory. Taking your example, "The council WILL appoint a moderator..." means that though it is expected of the council to appoint a moderator, but if it does not do so, it is not binding upon it.
CAN means it is the sweet will of the council to appoint or not appoint a moderator and nobody can do aything about it.
Does this help you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined on
Mon, Sep 6 2004
India
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abermond
#108924 Wed, 15 Jun 05 01:54 AM
|
|
I disagree.
In my work in California environmental law:
"shall" means "must",
"should" implies a suggestion or recommendation,
"will" is obligatory,
"would" is the hypothetical "will",
"can" implies able,
"could" implies possible.
In either case "The council shall..." or "The council will..." they are required to so. This is often (but not often enough) followed with designation of who will see to it that they have, and what the consequences are for failing to do so.
"The council can..." however, I agree is wholy optional. Though I prefer "The council may"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined on
Wed, Jun 15 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephe
#175103 Tue, 27 Dec 05 05:32 PM
|
|
Shall, will, would and should used to have clear meanings. Now, English speakers are using them differently. Unfortunately, we no longer agree on what they mean.
"If you would know the new meanings, then you should look at the old distinctions."
Old textbooks may have the following conjugations:
WILL
I shall --- we shall
--- you will
(s)he will --- they will
SHALL
I shall --- we shall
--- you shall
(s)he shall --- they shall
WOULD
I should --- we should
--- you would
(s)he would --- they would
SHOULD
I should --- we should
--- you should
(s)he should --- they should
This is unfortunate, all four words were different.
will = what the subject wants and is going to do.
shall = what the speaker wants the subject to do, the subject is going to do it.
would = what the subject wants to do. The subject might do it, but might not.
should = what the speaker wants the subject to do. It might happen, maybe not.
When the subject = the speaker ("I", "we") then shall=will, should=would
and shall and should were the preferred words.
----
Now we are not so happy being told what to do. They probably weren't happy being told what to do back then; but, they used to accept it more gracefully.
But we do make a big distinction between what we actually do and what we ought to do.
I see the meanings moving in this direction.
will = the actual future wanted or not
shall = the correct future
would = what actually happens under a condition
should = the correct thing to happen under a condition
|
|
|
|
|
Joined on
Mon, Dec 26 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|