Will and be are two of the English capital verbs. They have various uses, including the expression of propositions about the future, in what is usually referred to as the form of the English language of the future.
Traditional prescriptive grammar rules state that, when expressing pure purity (without additional meaning such as desire or command), must be used when the subject is in the first person ( me or we ), and will in other cases. In practice this rule is generally not adhered to by English speakers, and many speakers do not distinguish between will and should when expressing the future, using will > becomes much more common and less formal than required .
Will is widely used in bureaucratic documents, especially documents written by lawyers. Due to severe abuse, the meaning is unclear and the US Government Plain Language group advises writers not to use the word at all.
Video Shall and will
Etimologi
The verb should be from the Old English sceal . The original words in other Germanic languages ​​include Old Norse scal , German soll , and Dutch zal ; this all represents * skol - , o-grade from Indo-Europe * skel -. All of these verbs serve as helpers, representing either simple purity, or need or obligation.
The verb will comes from Old English willan , which means want or want. Cognates include Old Norse vilja , German
The Germanic beginnings did not inherit any Proto-Indo-European form to express a tense future, and the Germanic language has innovated using auxiliary verbs to express the future (this is evidenced in the Gothic and in the earliest recorded Germanic expression). In English, must and be are helpers who come to use for this purpose. (Another one used like that in Old English is mun , which deals with Scots maun and Modern English must .)
Maps Shall and will
Forms of derivation and pronunciation
Both will and will derive from verbs that have preterite-present conjugations in Old English (and generally in German), meaning that they are conjugated using a strong preterite form (ie the usual past tense form) as the current form of time. Because of this, like other capital verbs, they do not take the usual word -s in modern English a single third person now; we say he will and he will - not * he is hiding , and not * he wants (except in taste a rare "will" becomes a synonym of "wish" or "writing into the testament"). However, in ancient times, there are variants of shalt and wilt , used with you.
These two verbs also have their own preterite (past) form, ie must and be , derived from the actual preterites of the Old English verb (created using a dental suffix which forms the weaker verb preterites). These forms have developed a variety of meanings, often independent of the mandatory and will (as described in the should and be below). Apart from this, though, will and be (like other modals) are broken verbs - they have no other grammatical forms like infinitives, imperatives or participants. (For example, I want to eat something or He will go to sleep does not exist.)
Both will and will be contracted into - 'll , most often in affirmative statements where they follow subject pronouns. Their negotiations, will not and will not , also have a contract form: shall not and will not (though shall not is rarely used in North America, and rarely elsewhere as well). For more details see English auxiliary and contractions.
The pronunciation will is , and not is . However must have weak and strong pronunciation: when not pressed, and when emphasized. Shall not pronounced in the UK, New Zealand, South Africa, etc.; in North America (if used) it is pronounced , and both forms are acceptable in Australia (because the path is separate from the trap trap).
Custom use must or be
The capital verb should and be have been used in the past, and continue to be used, in various senses. Although when used purely as a marker of their future largely interchangeable (as will be discussed in the next section), each of the two verbs also has certain specific uses that can not be replaced by others without altering meaning.
The most common daily usage will in everyday English (though not so common in American English) is a question that serves as an offer or suggestion: "Should I...?" or "Can we...?" These are discussed under Ã, § Questions below.
In the statement, must have a specific use to express commands or instructions, usually in a high or formal list. This use may be incorporated into the use of mandatory to express the future, and is therefore discussed in detail below in Ã, §, Color Usage.
Will (but not should ) be used to express a customary behavior, often (but not exclusively) actions that are deemed disturbing by the speaker:
- He'll bite his nails, whatever I say.
- He will often stand on his head.
- Boys will be male.
Similarly, will be used to express something that can be expected to happen in a general case, or something very likely at the moment:
- The coat will last for two years if properly treated.
- It was Mo at the door.
The other major specific implication of will be is to express wishes, desires or intentions. It combines with its use in expressing the future, and is discussed under Color Use Ã, § Note. For its use in questions about the future, see Ã,§ Questions.
Usage must and be in future expression
Both will and will be used to indicate a situation as it is in the future; This construction is often referred to as the form of English of the future. As an example:
- Will they be here tomorrow?
- I will grow old someday.
When will or be directly set the main verb infinitive, as in the example above, the construction is called a simple future. Future marking can also be combined with aspect marking to produce a construction known as a progressive future ("He will work"), a perfect future ("He will succeed") and a perfectly progressive future ("He will work"). English also has other ways of referring to future circumstances, including construction going , and in many cases, the usual present-present form - details of this can be found in the article about going-to -to the future.
The verbs will and must , when used as future markers, are in practice highly interchangeable. Generally, will be much more common than be . The use of should be is usually a marked use, usually indicating formality and/or seriousness and (if not used with a first person subject) expressing the color meaning as described below. In some English dialects, the use of should be as a future marker is seen as archaic.
However there is a traditional rule of prescriptive grammar governing the use of will and will . According to this rule, when expressing futuritas and nothing more, help should be used with the subject of the first person ( I and we ), and will used in other cases. Using will with the first person or will with the second or third person is asserted to indicate some additional meaning other than plain purity. But in practice, this rule is often not observed - two assistants are used alternately, with will be much more common than should . This is discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Prescriptivist distinction
According to Merriam Webster's Use of Merriam Webster English Dictionary, the difference between should and be because future markers emerge from Latin teaching practices in English schools in the 14th century. It is customary to use will to translate Latin velle (meaning want, want or intend); this left should (which there is no other equivalent in Latin) to translate the future of Latin. This practice will continue to live in future markers; this is used consistently like that in the English Bible in Middle Wycliffe. However, in that common language will be the dominant in that role. Chaucer usually uses will to show the future, regardless of the grammatical person.
An influential advocate of prescriptive rules that should be used as a marker of the ordinary future of the first person is John Wallis. In [i] Grammatica Linguae Anglicanae (1653) he writes: "The rule is [...] to express future events without emotional tone, people have to say I will, we will, but you/he/they will, on the contrary, for emphasis, desire, or insistence, people have to say I/we will, but you/he/they will ".
Fowler writes in his book The King's English , about the rules for using shall vs. will , comment "the use of idiomatic, when it comes by nature to the southern English people... it is very complicated that those who are not by birth are barely able to obtain it". The Use of Modern English Pocket Fowler , OUP, 2002, says rules for the use of will and be : "it is unlikely that this rule has ever been basic consistent authority in actual use, and many examples of English [English] in print ignore it ".
Nevertheless, even among speakers (majority) who do not follow the rules of usage will as an unmarked form in the first person, there is still a tendency to use will and be to express various nuances of meaning (reflecting aspects of their original Old English senses). Thus should be used with the meaning of the obligation, and be with the meaning of desire or intention.
An illustration of the contrasting should between should and be (when prescriptive rules are adhered to) appeared in the 19th century, and had been repeated in the twentieth century and at 21:
- I'm going to drown; no one will save me! (expressing a sinking hope, a simple expression of future events)
- I'm going to drown; no one will save me! (Express the suicide intention: the first person would want, the third person should for "order")
An example of this distinction in writing occurs in Henry James' 1893 short essay
Writing in 2008, Steven Pinker doubted this concept, noting that he was "skeptical that every Englishman made that distinction in the last century."
A more popular illustration of the use of "must" with a second person to declare a determination to occur in words often quoted by fairy mothers has traditionally told Cinderella in the famous English version of fairy tales: "You must go to parties , Cinderella! "
The use of should be a common future marker on the first person persists in some of the more formal or higher English registers. An example is given by the famous speech Winston Churchill: "We will fight on the beach, we will fight at the landing, we will fight in the fields and on the streets, we will fight on the hill; we will never give up.
Colorful use
Whether the prescriptive rules mentioned above ( should be for an unmarked future in the first person) is obeyed, there is a certain meaning in which will or be tend to be used than others. Some of them have already been mentioned (see Specific Uses section). However, there are also cases where the expressed meaning combines plain futurism with some additional implications; this may be referred to as "color" use of future markers.
Thus must be used (especially in the second and third persons) to imply orders, promises or threats made by the speaker (ie that future events symbolized speakers' will rather than subjects). As an example:
- You will regret it long. (Speaker Threat)
- You will not pass! (Speaker command)
- You have to go to the dance. (speaker promise)
In the above sentence, will be replaced by will without altering the intended meaning, even though the form with will also be interpreted as a plain. statement about the expected future. The use of should be often associated with formality and/or seriousness, in addition to coloring meaning. For some specific cases of official use, see the sections below on Ã,§Ã, Uses of laws and Ã, § Technical specifications.
(Other uses, generally ancient, must are in certain dependent clauses with future reference, as in "Rewards should be given to anyone who has done their best." More normal here in modern English is a simple present tense: "whoever does the best" see the use of the English verb form the Dependent clause à .
On the other hand, will be used (in the first person) to emphasize the will, desire or intention of the speaker:
- I'll lend you £, £ 10,000 at 5% (the speaker is willing to make a loan, but that's not necessary)
- I'll get my way.
Most speakers have will as a future marker in any case, but when the meaning is as above, even those who follow or are affected by prescriptive rules will tend to use will i> have to they will use with the subject of the first person for the untidy future).
The sharing of use will and should be somewhat different in the question than in the statement; see the following sections for details.
Question
In question, traditional prescriptive usage is that the helper used should be expected in the answer. Therefore, by asking factually about the future, one can ask: "Do you want to accompany me?" (In accordance with the expected answer "I will", because the rules governing will as an unstained future marker on the first person). To use will will instead turn the question into a request. In practice, however, will be almost never used in this type of question. To mark a factual question as distinct from a request, the future of going-to (or just present tense) can be used: "Will you accompany me?" (or "Did you accompany me?").
The main use of mandatory in question is to the subject of the first person ( I or we ), to make offers and suggestions, or to ask for advice or instruction:
- Should I open a window?
- Should we dance?
- Where do we go today?
- What should I do next?
This is common in England and other parts of the English-speaking world; it is also found in the United States, but there should often be a less marked alternative. Usually the use of will in a question like that would change the meaning of being a simple request for information: "Should I play the goalkeeper?" is an offer or suggestion, while "Will I play the goalkeeper?" just a question about the expected future situation. However, for many speakers in the United States, the form will can also be used as an offer (in this case "Will I play the goalkeeper?") Can be used to clearly show the pure request for information).
The meaning above required is usually limited to direct questions with the first person subject. In the case of a reported question (even if not reported in the past tense), should possibly be replaced by must or another capital verb like maybe : "He asked if he should open the window"; "He asked if they could dance."
Therefore, helper can be used in either question just to ask about what to expect in the future, or (especially with your second person subject ) to make a request:
- Where will tomorrow be played? (Factual inquiries)
- Will the new director do a good job? (question for opinion)
- Will you marry me? (request)
Legal and technical use
Legislative and contractual acts sometimes use "must" and "should not" to express mandatory and prohibited actions. However, it is sometimes used to mean "maybe" or "can". The most famous example of both the use of the word "will" is the Constitution of the United States. The claim that "will" be used to indicate facts, or not used with different meanings above, has led to discussion and has significant consequences for interpreting the meaning of the intended text. The demand for the meaning of the word is also common.
In many needs specifications, especially those involving software, the words should and be have special meaning. Most of the requirements specifications use the word will to indicate something that is required, while ordering will for a simple statement about the future (mainly because "going to" is usually seen as too informal for context law). However, some documents deviate from this convention and use the words should , be , and must to indicate the strength of the requirements. Some requirements specification will define the terms at the beginning of the document.
Will and will be distinguished by NASA and Wikiversity as follows:
- Will is usually used to indicate device or system requirements. For example: "The selected generator must provide a minimum of 80 Kilowatt."
- Will is generally used to indicate the device or the destination of the system. For example, "The new generator will be used to power the operation tent."
In the standards issued by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), the ASTM (the American Society for Testing and Materials), the IEEE (Electrical Institute and Electronic Engineer), the requirement of "must" is a mandatory requirement, , "must", or "must". The IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) defines should and should be synonymous terms that indicate absolute requirements, and must as indicating rather flexible requirements, in RFC document.
On specifications and standards issued by the United States Department of Defense (DEPD), the requirement with "must" is a mandatory requirement. ("Must" shall not be used to express mandatory provisions Use the term "must.") "Will" declare simple wills or ambiguities, and "shall" and "may" imply non-legal provisions.
Outside of the Department of Defense, other parts of the US government advised against using the word should for three reasons: it had no clear meaning, it caused litigation, and almost nothing from ordinary speech. The legal references Words and Phrases dedicate 76 pages to summarize hundreds of lawsuits centered around the meaning of words. When referring to legal or technical terms, the Words and Phrases otherwise favor should be when saving should for recommendations.
Should and be
As noted above, should and be originate as a past tense of shall and will . In some applications they can still be identified as the verb (or conditional) form of the verb, but they have also developed some special meanings of their own verbs.
Independent usage
The primary usage of must be in modern English is as synonymous of should , express quasi-obligation, feasibility, or hope (can not be replaced by will in this meaning). Example:
- You should not say things like that. (it's wrong to do it)
- He has to move his pawn. (just right to do it)
- Why do you suspect me? (for what reason should I suspect?)
- You must have enough time to complete the job. (predictions)
- I should be able to come. (prediction, implying uncertainty)
- There should be cheese in the kitchen. (hope)
Other special uses should involve mere unexpected mood expressions:
- in terms of clause (protasis), e.g. "If it has to rain" or "Should it rain"; see English conditional sentence
- as an alternative to subjunctive, e.g. "It is important that he (should) go"; see subjunctive English
The main usage of will be is in the conditional clause (explained in detail in the article on the English conditional sentence):
- I will not be here if you do not call me.
In this usage, will be sometimes (though rarely) replaced by should when the subject is in the first person (based on the same prescriptive rules that demand will rather than will be a marker of the normal future for that person). It should be found in stock phrases like "I should think" and "I should expect". But its use in the more general case is archaic or very formal, and can cause ambiguity with the more general use of should mean should . This is illustrated by the following sentences:
- You will apologize if you see it. (Conditional pure, state what will happen)
- You should apologize if you see it. (state what is appropriate)
- I will apologize if I see it. (pure conditional)
- I have to apologize if I see it. (possibly the above formal variants, but it can be understood to state what is appropriate)
In ancient usage will have been used to indicate the desire of the present time. "Will I die" means "I wish I died". "I will be discouraged" means "I will be happy".
More details about using should , be and other related helpers can be found in articles in the English capital verbs.
As always should and be
When will and should function as a pastor will and should , its use tends to correspond to those in the last verb ( will be analogous to will , and should for should ).
Thus will and must be used with the meaning of "future-in-the-past", to express what is expected to happen, or what actually happens, after some time reference. The use of should here (as would be a regular future marker) is much less common and generally limited to the first person. Example:
- He left Bath in 1890, and will never return. (actually he never came back after that)
- It looks like it's going to rain. (Rain predicted)
- Little did I know that I would ( rarely: should) see it again the next day.
Will also be used as the past equivalent will in other special uses, as in expressing custom actions (see English marker of the # Would aspect):
- Last summer we will go fishing a lot. (I used to fish a lot)
In particular, will and be be used as the past equivalent will and must in the indirect greeting reported in time past:
- The stairs will fall. -> He said that the ladder will fall.
- You must obey me! -> He said that I must obey him. (or periphrastically: He ordered me to obey)
- I'm going to go swimming this afternoon. -> I said that I have to go swimming in the afternoon.
As with any conditional use mentioned above, the use of must in that case may lead to ambiguity; in the last example it is not clear whether the original statement is will (reveal a clear future) or should (meaning "must"). Similarly "the archbishop says that we should all sins from time to time" is meant to report the statement that "We will all sins from time to time" (where >> Will show a simple future), but instead gives a very misleading impression that the original word is must (meaning "should").
See also
- English verb
- Grammatical person
- Verbs in English Grammar (wikibook)
References
External links
- "Shall and Will". Fowler, H. W. 1908. The King's English - a thorough discussion on this issue
- Full description of the English Tenses
- Webster 1913 - Entry for Must
- "The Origin of the Prescriptive Grammar Rules" - Quoting the Origin and Development of English , Pyles and Algeo, 1993
- Resurrection Prescriptivism in English (PDF format)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments