"Bryan Morris" wrote in message
...
In message , Robin writes
ce?

Traditionally it's the difference between:

a. a statement of (expected) fact: eg "you will read this post"; and
b. an order or command: eg "you shall read this post" [often with an
explicit or implicit "or else"]

Many years ago now I was the personal assistant to the senior partner in a
professional firm.

In the days before computers / word processors I often dictated reports of
maybe hundreds of pages to my secretary. When finished the reports then
went to the senior partner to sign and send to clients. Many pages with
diagrams, graphs, forecasts, tables, etc.

Quite often the reports came back with lines through many pages because
the senior partner did not like my use of would, should, shall, will,
could, can etc. Meaning my secretary often had to retype the whole report

I felt like I could have killed him

I felt like I should have killed him

I felt like I would have killed him

Like the English tourist who fell into Loch Ness, and shouted 'I will drown
and no one shall save me'

So they left him to get on with it...

James

"James Heaton" wrote

Traditionally it's the difference between:

a. a statement of (expected) fact: eg "you will read this post"; and
b. an order or command: eg "you shall read this post" [often with an
explicit or implicit "or else"]


Like the English tourist who fell into Loch Ness, and shouted 'I will
drown and no one shall save me'

So they left him to get on with it...


Nope, has to be the Thames or rather the Isis unless all his auditors were
Oxfordian too.

The Scots never observed the rule.


--
Mike D

On Tuesday, 15 March 2016 01:36:09 UTC, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

Nope, has to be the Thames or rather the Isis unless all his auditors were
Oxfordian too.

cough Oxonian /cough

I rather thought you would have fun with that one.

For what it's worth, and personally I think it's largely an attempt to divine a rule where none is needed, the Penguin Writer's Manual has this to say:

"Traditionally 'shall' was used to form the future tense for the first person singular and plural ('I/we shall go tomorrow') and to state a firm intention if used with any other personal pronoun ('You shall go to the ball'; 'Britons never, never, never shall be slaves'). Conversely 'will' formed the future tense for the second and third person ('You/they will know soon enough') and expressed a firm intention if used with 'I' or 'we' ('I will not put up with this'). This distinction has largely died out, with 'I will' or 'we will' being used in informal usage and the general use of the contraction ''ll', e.g. 'I'll', 'we'll'. 'Shall', however, is needed when asking questions that relate to the immediate situation: 'Shall we dance?' is an invitation to someone to dance now; 'Will we dance?' only makes sense if the speaker is looking ahead to the possibility of dancing at some future event, as in 'Will there be dancing?'"

To my mind, the reliance on stock phrases from pantomime and music hall rather undermines the attempt to justify any hard and fast rule. But hey ho. I shall test you on "may" and "might" next. (Or will I?) :-)
--
Joyce Whitchurch, Stalybridge, UK
=================================