0
Usenet Posted 22 years ago
English in UK
Sense and Sensibility
I'm reading "Sense and Sensibility" by Jane Austen and, though I have read only some fifty pages so far, I have already found a possible peculiarity in Jane Austen's language, concerning her usage of should and would.
She happens to use "should" for such set phrases as "I should think/hope/expect so" and "would" for the other cases, e.g.:
"I would not wish to do any thing mean," he replied.
"I would lay fifty guineas the letter was of his own writing."
Nontheless, in some cases which don't seem to differ from those in which she prefers "would", Austen uses "should", e.g.:
"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended with Elinor - she was only in jest. I should scold her myself, if she were capable of wishing to check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."
I would have expected a more consistent usage of "should" and "would", that is to say, either:
1) She could have used "should" only in set phrases (e.g. "Ishould/hope/expect so") and "would" for ordinary conditionals (as she seems to do for most of the time), "should" being used only for conditional duty;> that is what happens today, more or less
> that is what traditional rules said (Fowler, for example)
Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" for ordinary conditionals (e.g. "I would not wish", "I would not lay") and "should" for some conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?
Bye, FB
She happens to use "should" for such set phrases as "I should think/hope/expect so" and "would" for the other cases, e.g.:
"I would not wish to do any thing mean," he replied.
"I would lay fifty guineas the letter was of his own writing."
Nontheless, in some cases which don't seem to differ from those in which she prefers "would", Austen uses "should", e.g.:
"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended with Elinor - she was only in jest. I should scold her myself, if she were capable of wishing to check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."
I would have expected a more consistent usage of "should" and "would", that is to say, either:
1) She could have used "should" only in set phrases (e.g. "Ishould/hope/expect so") and "would" for ordinary conditionals (as she seems to do for most of the time), "should" being used only for conditional duty;
> that is what happens today, more or less
2) She could have used "should" in set phrases and ordinary conditional (asshe seems to do in such phrases as "I should scold her myself"), "would" being used only to express a conditional will.
> that is what traditional rules said (Fowler, for example)Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" for ordinary conditionals (e.g. "I would not wish", "I would not lay") and "should" for some conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?
Bye, FB
Top answer
g. g. [/nq] There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.
- g.
- g.
- [/nq] There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.
- Adrian
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
[nq:1]I'm reading "Sense and Sensibility" by Jane Austen and, though I have read only some fifty pages so far, I have already found a possible peculiarityin Jane Austen's language, concerning her usage of should and would.[/nq]
(snip)
[nq:1]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" for ordinary conditionals (e.g. "I would not wish", "I would not lay") and "should" for some
(snip)
[nq:1]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" for ordinary conditionals (e.g. "I would not wish", "I would not lay") and "should" for some
00
More the way the people spoke in Jane Austen's time.
There are/were some grammatical rules about the usage of "shall" vs. "will" and "should" vs. "would" in standard British English, but these seem to be dying out and many varieties of English, e.g. standard English as spoken in Ireland, have never followed these distinctions.
Regards, Einde O'Callaghan
There are/were some grammatical rules about the usage of "shall" vs. "will" and "should" vs. "would" in standard British English, but these seem to be dying out and many varieties of English, e.g. standard English as spoken in Ireland, have never followed these distinctions.
Regards, Einde O'Callaghan
00
Adrian Bailey > uk.culture.language.english in
[nq:2]"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended ... check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."[/nq]
[nq:2]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" ... conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?[/nq]
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way peop
[nq:2]"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended ... check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."[/nq]
[nq:2]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" ... conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?[/nq]
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way peop
00
Adrian Bailey > uk.culture.language.english in
[nq:2]"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended ... check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."[/nq]
[nq:2]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" ... conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?[/nq]
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way peop
[nq:2]"My love," said her mother, "you must not be offended ... check the delight of your conversation with our new friend."[/nq]
[nq:2]Where is the sense, in your opinion, in using "would" ... conditionals (e.g. "I should scold her myself if...") as ordinary?[/nq]
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way peop
00
, Enrico C (Email Removed) writes
[nq:1]Adrian Bailey > uk.culture.language.english in[/nq]
[nq:2]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.[/nq]
[nq:1]That's interesting :-) I, as an EFL speaker, happen to have the same kind of doubts as FB. I would expect that using "should" instead of "would" conveyed a slightly different shade of meaning.[/
[nq:1]Adrian Bailey > uk.culture.language.english in[/nq]
[nq:2]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.[/nq]
[nq:1]That's interesting :-) I, as an EFL speaker, happen to have the same kind of doubts as FB. I would expect that using "should" instead of "would" conveyed a slightly different shade of meaning.[/
00
[nq:1]I'm reading "Sense and Sensibility" by Jane Austen and, though I have read only some fifty pages so far, I have already found a possible peculiarity in Jane Austen's language, concerning her usage of should and would.[/nq]
JA never regarded herself as an authority on grammar though did she? As she pointed out in a note to her sister Cassandra: "I do not write for such dull elves
As h
JA never regarded herself as an authority on grammar though did she? As she pointed out in a note to her sister Cassandra: "I do not write for such dull elves
As h
00
"Adrian Bailey" (Email Removed) ha scritto nel messaggio
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.[/nq]
I see, but there will be a sense in their choice of this or that auxiliary, I hope. Anyhow, I think I now see Austen's intentions:
I would not wish> It is not my intention, but...
[nq:1]There doesn't have to be any "sense" in it, it's just the way people speak/write.[/nq]
I see, but there will be a sense in their choice of this or that auxiliary, I hope. Anyhow, I think I now see Austen's intentions:
I would not wish
> It is not my intention, but...
I would lay... Still, I don't do th
00
[nq:2]I'm reading "Sense and Sensibility" by Jane Austen and, though ... Jane Austen's language, concerning her usage of should and would.[/nq]
[nq:1]JA never regarded herself as an authority on grammar though did she? As she pointed out in a note to her sister Cassandra: "I do not write for such dull elves As have not a great deal of ingenuity themselves."[/nq]
In dramatisations of Jane A
[nq:1]JA never regarded herself as an authority on grammar though did she? As she pointed out in a note to her sister Cassandra: "I do not write for such dull elves As have not a great deal of ingenuity themselves."[/nq]
In dramatisations of Jane A
00
"Phil C." (Email Removed) ha scritto nel messaggio
[nq:1]In dramatisations of Jane Austen the characters never abbreviate their verbs - they say "do not", "will not", "shall not" ... actually spoke at the time or was it simply that it wasn't considered proper to abbreviate in writing (as above)?[/nq]
I have noticed this, too.
Bye, FB
[nq:1]In dramatisations of Jane Austen the characters never abbreviate their verbs - they say "do not", "will not", "shall not" ... actually spoke at the time or was it simply that it wasn't considered proper to abbreviate in writing (as above)?[/nq]
I have noticed this, too.
Bye, FB
0
Related Questions