0
Son James Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Looks the second contional! would or should?
Please first look at this question.
When she couldn't find any, she kindly filled out a form requesting the item be held for me ____ the store receive another shipment. I was very impressed by Ms.Warren's willingness to help.
(1)would (2) should
The correct answer is "(2)should. I have two things to ask you in the sentence.
First, for the verb of "request", the writer used it as a causative verb like the verbs of "get" and "have". It requests the item be held for me. Am I right ?
Secondly, the questioner didn't write as "the store receives" ,and just wrote as "receive" as its infinitive. I could easily catch there is no "Auxiliary verb" ,which means the clause that the store another shipment concluded into a second conditional. Then, where is the main clause ? and why can't I use "would" there ? If the store would receive another shipment. If the store should receive another shipment. I think there is no big gap in the meanings.
Couldn't you help me a little bit with understanding this question ?
When she couldn't find any, she kindly filled out a form requesting the item be held for me ____ the store receive another shipment. I was very impressed by Ms.Warren's willingness to help.
(1)would (2) should
The correct answer is "(2)should. I have two things to ask you in the sentence.
First, for the verb of "request", the writer used it as a causative verb like the verbs of "get" and "have". It requests the item be held for me. Am I right ?
Secondly, the questioner didn't write as "the store receives" ,and just wrote as "receive" as its infinitive. I could easily catch there is no "Auxiliary verb" ,which means the clause that the store another shipment concluded into a second conditional. Then, where is the main clause ? and why can't I use "would" there ? If the store would receive another shipment. If the store should receive another shipment. I think there is no big gap in the meanings.
Couldn't you help me a little bit with understanding this question ?
Top answer
I can see why, to a non-native speaker, the words should and would might look almost the same in this situation. However, to a native English speaker the answer, by instinct, is obvious: 2) should - it cannot be would. As to why it is "should," the answer is more in the realm of idiom and traditional usage (evolved over hundreds of years), than grammatical theory.
- I can see why, to a non-native speaker, the words should and would might look almost the same in this situation.
- However, to a native English speaker the answer, by instinct, is obvious: 2) should - it cannot be would.
- As to why it is "should," the answer is more in the realm of idiom and traditional usage (evolved over hundreds of years), than grammatical theory.
- There are certain constructions in English where "should" is traditionally used like this, for example: Let me know if she should call.
- ) Should we receive any information about your missing father, we'll let you know immediately.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
I can see why, to a non-native speaker, the words should and would might look almost the same in this situation. However, to a native English speaker the answer, by instinct, is obvious: 2) should - it cannot be would. As to why it is "should," the answer is more in the realm of idiom and traditional usage (evolved over hundreds of years), than grammatical theory. There are certain construction
00
It is so hard to understand their difference. I think I need to read your answers again and again.Anyway, Is it not related to the second conditional. Right ? I hope you can even confirm this matter. Really thank you so much,Mr.Anonymous.
00
Rules similar to those for choosing between shall and will have long been advanced for should and would, but again the rules have had little effect on usage. In most constructions, would is the auxiliary chosen regardless of the person of the subject: If our allies would support the move, we would abandon any claim to sovereignty. You would be surprised at the complexity of the directions.
00
Should she call, tell her I am not home = If she happens to call, tell her I am not home. Would - will not work!
There is no conditional element of any kind in this sentence.
Had she paid attention to the lectures, she would have passed the exam. ( but of course she didn't because she was busy texting) This is a conditional of the 3rd kind.
There is no conditional element of any kind in this sentence.
Had she paid attention to the lectures, she would have passed the exam. ( but of course she didn't because she was busy texting) This is a conditional of the 3rd kind.
00
0
0
dimsumexpressShould she call, tell her I am not home = If she happens to call, tell her I am not home. [...] There is no conditional element of any kind in this sentence.Well, it is a conditional sentence.
00
fivejedjonWell, it is a conditional sentence.Correct me if I am wrong. Although the equation suggested its conditional tone, "should" is never described and considered as an conditional element in the traditional grammar; is it? . Maybe " Had she called..." Or, " If she calls......
00
It is unfortunate that many course books and basic grammars give the impression that conditions are expressed only with ‘if’ – and that there are only three (or four or five) types of conditional sentence. In fact there are many ways of expressing conditions in English. Here are some:
If you heat ice, it melts.
If you
If you heat ice, it melts.
If you
00
Fortunate or not, book reference is what learners depend on for guidance. Not everyone is a grammarian or a linguist. I would reserve my opnions on some of these examples whether they are legitimate "conditionals". I'd leave that to other experts.
Should he (inversion) refuse, we can always try the courts.
Should he (inversion) refuse, we can always try the courts.
0
Related Questions