will and would to talk about habits

The will one expresses more the persistence of the habit. It can show that the speaker is irritated by the habit, or finds the habit unusual.

For past time:

- Every day, Dan would come home from work and turn on the Tv.

(see Swan, Practical English Usage, will/would)

I can't see the difference between these two sentences.
- Every day Dan will come home from work and turn on the Tv.
- Every day Dan comes home from work and turns on the Tv.

There really isn't a lot of difference.
In addition to the comments already made above, I would say that the use of will in such statements i

The version with "will" can, but doesn't necessarily, show that the speaker is irritated by the habit, or finds the habit unusual. In speech, the "will" that denotes irritation or mild bemusement has a rising intonation.

As CJ says, the "will" version is used where you want to suggest continuation of the habit; while the "would" version seems usually to signify a past habit. (Hence

CalifJimThere really isn't a lot of difference.
In addition to the comments already made above, I would say that the use of will in such statements indicates a habit or behavior that the speaker is fairly certain is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. Without the will the statement is more neutral with respect to such implied predictions.

<The version with "will" can, but doesn't necessarily, show that the speaker is irritated by the habit, or finds the habit unusual. In speech, the "will" that denotes irritation or mild bemusement has a rising intonation.>

Not always.

I would say that that is quite a difference.

I see.

My idea of "quite a difference" is more like saying We have a pet iguana when you mean My ugly sister sneezed on Mum's prune Danish.

CalifJim

I would say that that is quite a difference.

I see.

My idea of "quite a difference" is more like saying We have a pet iguana when you mean My ugly sister sneezed on Mum's prune Danish.

This structure seems very close to "wildlife documentary will", e.g.

1. Then the tiger will clamp down on the neck, suffocating its victim...After the kill has been made, the tiger will drag the carcass to a thick undergrowth...

MrP

If you read carefully, you will see that I simply echoed what you had already said, for the most part. That's why I posted "In addition to ...", not "In disagreement with ...".

I don't see how you can object to this

Without the will the statement is more neutral with respect to such implied predictions.

unless you feel that the statements wi