+0
It would be an exaggeration to describe the French capital this week as a ghost town, but if you were a Parisian restaurant owner or a Parisian shop keeper you might be forgiven for doing so.
In my quarter, the popular pizza restaurant had to close because the chef and waiters could not get to work.
The boulangerie, usually stripped of its millefeuilles (custard pastry) and tartes aux fraises (strawberry tart) long before I get home from work, is still bulging with patisserie.

The baker tells me he is down 30-40% on sales because the usual customers did not dare risk being stranded in the city, and - instead - stayed home.
And in my local eight-till-late shop, the Moroccan shopkeeper grumbled it just was not worth stocking up on fresh produce - everyone was so tired after hours walking to and from work, they either did not bother to eat in the evenings or they just raided the freezer. It felt, he said, like there was a war on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should it be 'It would be an exaggeration to describe the French ... ?
Why can't we write 'It will be an exaggeration to describe the French ...?
One of the reasons to write 'would be' is to indicate the hypothetical nature. I learnt this from Marius and a few others who contribute here.
I don't think there is any hypothetical aspect in the given context.
+0
Hi,

It would be an exaggeration to describe the French capital this week as a ghost town, but if you were a Parisian restaurant owner or a Parisian shop keeper you might be forgiven for doing so.

Why should it be 'It would be an exaggeration to describe the French ... ?

Why can't we write 'It will be an exaggeration to describe the French ...?

One of the reasons to write 'would be' is to indicate the hypothetical nature. I learnt this from Marius and a few others who contribute here.

I don't think there is any hypothetical aspect in the given context.

Consider these simpler examples.

It would be a crime to kill you. I'm not going to kill you. I'm just talking about a hypothetical action.

It will be a crime to kill you. This sounds like I am actually going to kill you. It's not just a hypothetical action.

It's the same for the sentence you are asking about.

It would be an exaggeration to describe the French capital this week as a ghost town I'm not going to describe it that way. I'm just talking about a hypothetical action.

It will an exaggeration to describe the French capital this week as a ghost town This sounds like I am actually going to describe it that way. It's not just a hypothetical action.

Best wishes, Clive
Comments  
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thanks Clive
So in any kind of hypothetical situation you are free to use the 'would' form.

1. It would be unnecessary to study Latin or Sanskrit as they are dead languages.

2. It will be unnecessary to study Latin or Sanskrit as they are dead languages.

I hope both of the above sentences are grammatically correct. The first sentence is the hypothetical case. I mean I am not going to study Latin or Sanskrit.

The second sentence borders that I have some plans to study Latin or Sanskrit . I am just telling you it is an useless effort.

I hope I am correct here. Please tell me.
Hi,

So in any kind of hypothetical situation you are free to use the 'would' form. Broadly speaking, yes, although I hesitate to say 'in every case'.

1. It would be unnecessary to study Latin or Sanskrit as they are dead languages.

2. It will be unnecessary to study Latin or Sanskrit as they are dead languages.

I hope both of the above sentences are grammatically correct. The first sentence is the hypothetical case. I mean I am not going to study Latin or Sanskrit. But if I did (ie hypothetically), it would not be necessary.

The second sentence borders that I have some plans Yes to study Latin or Sanskrit . I am just telling you it is an useless effort.

Clive
Thanks Clive
This is not easy.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.