The man who would be a king

AlpheccaStars

MoonriseFor example, "James would be a lawyer."

Notice the difference:

"The Man who Would be King". => A noun phrase, without the determiner "a" and in title case. It is not a sentence. That leads one to think of Rudyard Kipling's novella. The grammar is old fashioned, more than a century old.

"James would be a lawyer." => A full unexceptional sentence, correct with the determiner "a". The interpretation is that it is future relative to a time the past.

Thanks a lot for your clarification. I understand the second part. Regarding the first part, if it's an old grammar, I may not need to go deeply. I'm just curious to know if I keep it as a noun phrase and I say "The man who would be lawyer". That's not a name of a novel or anything. Based on the old grammar, does it mean that the man wanted to be a lawyer?

Would it make a difference in meaning if I add "a" before the noun "lawyer" in the same phrase?