0
Ikia Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Shall and Will
Most writers don't seem to distinguish between shall and will. Does that mean we no longer can express the emphatic future tense?
Many say it doesn't matter which you use. Well, it does if you want to use an emphatic future tense. Our verb tenses with their progressive and passive voices and emphatic tenses help to express an action precisely and specifically. What an incredibly complex, but expressive written language, huh?
What seems to be the latest on this? Anyone know?
Ikia
Many say it doesn't matter which you use. Well, it does if you want to use an emphatic future tense. Our verb tenses with their progressive and passive voices and emphatic tenses help to express an action precisely and specifically. What an incredibly complex, but expressive written language, huh?
What seems to be the latest on this? Anyone know?
Ikia
Top answer
Dear Ikia Shall and will are both valid forms, but shall is often now considered to be more formal, so many speakers/writers do not use it at all! As an emphatic word, shall is very good, but many would consider its use to be rather old-fashioned... " I shall go to the ball", said Cinderella!
- Dear Ikia Shall and will are both valid forms, but shall is often now considered to be more formal, so many speakers/writers do not use it at all!
- As an emphatic word, shall is very good, but many would consider its use to be rather old-fashioned...
- " I shall go to the ball", said Cinderella!
- See also Practical English Usage by Michael Swan, (Oxford University Press) Regards
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
16 Answers
0
Dear Ikia
Shall and will are both valid forms, but shall is often now considered to be more formal, so many speakers/writers do not use it at all!
As an emphatic word, shall is very good, but many would consider its use to be rather old-fashioned... " I shall go to the ball", said Cinderella!
See also Practical English Usage by
Shall and will are both valid forms, but shall is often now considered to be more formal, so many speakers/writers do not use it at all!
As an emphatic word, shall is very good, but many would consider its use to be rather old-fashioned... " I shall go to the ball", said Cinderella!
See also Practical English Usage by
00
Old fashion? But shall is used for a future tense for first person; will is used for second and third persons.
For the emphatic future tense, will is used for first person; shall is used for second and third.
Thanks for your input; we have, indeed, lost our emphatic future tense.
Ikia
For the emphatic future tense, will is used for first person; shall is used for second and third.
Thanks for your input; we have, indeed, lost our emphatic future tense.
Ikia
00
Hi,
I believe it's correct to say that 'shall' is not a characteristic of AmE.
Clive
I believe it's correct to say that 'shall' is not a characteristic of AmE.
Clive
00
But shall is used for a future tense for first person; will is used for second and third persons.I have heard that this is a totally bogus rule made up by a 17th century grammarian whose brain was just a little too idle one day. I have never known anyone to follow this convention, and if rumor is correct, no one ever has!
As an American, I can safely say
00
"Shall" still occurs as an ordinary 1st person future in BrE (especially in questions).
But it seems to be moving towards a purely "emphatic" role.
MrP
But it seems to be moving towards a purely "emphatic" role.
MrP
00
Hi,
The OALD says,
In modern English the traditional difference between shall and will has almost disappeared, and shall is not used very much at all, especially in American English. Shall is now only used with I and we, and often sounds formal and old-fashioned.
In British English shall is still used with I and we in questions or when you want to make a sugges
The OALD says,
In modern English the traditional difference between shall and will has almost disappeared, and shall is not used very much at all, especially in American English. Shall is now only used with I and we, and often sounds formal and old-fashioned.
In British English shall is still used with I and we in questions or when you want to make a sugges
00
Shall cannot be used in all persons and still be considered emphatic. Shall is emphatic in first person, but "will" forms the emphatic in second and third persons.
If you believe in an emphatic future tense, then you must, at least in written formal English, where you can't shout for emphasis, distinguish shall from will in the various persons.
As I said earlier, it appears that
If you believe in an emphatic future tense, then you must, at least in written formal English, where you can't shout for emphasis, distinguish shall from will in the various persons.
As I said earlier, it appears that
00
I'm a little fuzzy-headed this morning; but I believe that in the traditional distinction, "shall" formed the ordinary future for the 1st person, and the "emphatic" or "emotional" future in the 2nd and 3rd persons. We still see this 1st person usage in questions:
1. Shall I call you later?
MrP
1. Shall I call you later?
MrP
00
Your post implies that Americans have not learned to distinguish between the future tense and the emphatic future tense. It's not bogus that the English language has a simple future tense and an emphatic future tense, is it?
Ikia
Ikia
00
Hello Ikia
Sorry about the confusion. I wasn't talking about American or British usage now. My point was rather that the distinction in your previous post:
<Shall cannot be used in all persons and still be considered emphatic. Shall is emphatic in first person, but "will" forms the emphatic in second and third persons.>
is the opposite of what we find in "tradition
Sorry about the confusion. I wasn't talking about American or British usage now. My point was rather that the distinction in your previous post:
<Shall cannot be used in all persons and still be considered emphatic. Shall is emphatic in first person, but "will" forms the emphatic in second and third persons.>
is the opposite of what we find in "tradition
0
Related Questions