-
PsychoSerenity
- "I" Self-Perceive Recursively
- Posts: 7824
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
-
Contact:
Post
by PsychoSerenity » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:32 pm
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:I think "shall" is more of a "command", rather than the "forecast" of "will".

[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
-
MiM
- Man In The Middle
- Posts: 5459
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:07 pm
- Location: Finland
-
Contact:
Post
by MiM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:34 pm
FBM wrote:Bella Fortuna wrote:Shall v. will is interesting as it often comes into play in contracts - collective bargaining agreements in my experience. Often a lot of niggling is done between these two words in negotiations to define precisely what the obligation is.
To correctly use "shall," confine it to the meaning "has a duty to" and use it to impose a duty on a capable actor. Bryan A. Garner, A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage 940–941 (2d ed., Oxford U. Press 1995). Here's how:
Lessee shall sell the remaining oil . . .
In other words--
Lessee [an actor capable of carrying out an obligation] shall [has a duty to] sell the remaining oil . . .
Some suggest that lawyers are incapable of using "shall" correctly, so we ought to banish it entirely. Michèle M. Asprey, Shall Must Go, 3 Scribes J. Leg. Writing 79 (1992). One recommendation is to use "must" instead. Of course, you cannot search and replace every "shall" with "must." Scrutinize each use carefully.
This makes me yearn for the North Koreans to attack.

You can believe, I have been sitting through some "interesting" discussions about this, when negotiating technical documents pertaining to the CTBT. No North Koreans there, but South Koreans, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Israeli, Russians... and fifty other nations. It can get rather interesting to negotiate the exact wording of a text, when most parties are not native in the language used (as of course, neither am I).

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool - Richard Feynman
-
FBM
- Ratz' first Gritizen.
- Posts: 45327
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
- About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
-
Contact:
Post
by FBM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:38 pm
PsychoSerenity wrote:Gawdzilla Sama wrote:I think "shall" is more of a "command", rather than the "forecast" of "will".

Yeah, but he's gay, so that don't count nothing.
MiM wrote:You can believe, I have been sitting through some "interesting" discussions about this, when negotiating technical documents pertaining to the CTBT. No North Koreans there, but South Koreans, Chinese, Japanese, Iranians, Israeli, Russians... and fifty other nations. It can get rather interesting to negotiate the exact wording of a text, when most parties are not native in the language used.

Yes, I can believe this very easily.

"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
-
Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 51225
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
-
Contact:
Post
by Tero » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:47 pm
Shall is useless. But use should and would where needed.
-
FBM
- Ratz' first Gritizen.
- Posts: 45327
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
- About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
-
Contact:
Post
by FBM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:56 pm
Tero wrote:Shall is useless. But use should and would where needed.
I shall endeavor to persevere in this respect.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
-
MiM
- Man In The Middle
- Posts: 5459
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:07 pm
- Location: Finland
-
Contact:
Post
by MiM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:57 pm
Tero wrote:Shall is useless. But use should and would where needed.
Should and would, now you are awakening some really bad memories

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool - Richard Feynman
-
Tyrannical
- Posts: 6468
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
-
Contact:
Post
by Tyrannical » Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:59 pm
To me there seems to be a difference in usage between "Where shall we go to dinner" vs "Where will we go to dinner". When I use shall, I am asking for their opinion on where we should go, as opposed to asking them to predict the future.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
-
FBM
- Ratz' first Gritizen.
- Posts: 45327
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
- About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
-
Contact:
Post
by FBM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:07 pm
Tyrannical wrote:To me there seems to be a difference in usage between "Where shall we go to dinner" vs "Where will we go to dinner". When I use shall, I am asking for their opinion on where we should go, as opposed to asking them to predict the future.
Ah. So things change a bit when we shift to the interrogative. That's good information.

"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
-
Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
-
Contact:
Post
by Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:08 pm
PsychoSerenity wrote:Gawdzilla Sama wrote:I think "shall" is more of a "command", rather than the "forecast" of "will".


Ein Ubootsoldat wrote:“Ich melde mich ab. Grüssen Sie bitte meine Kameraden.”
-
Tyrannical
- Posts: 6468
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
-
Contact:
Post
by Tyrannical » Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:12 pm
FBM wrote:Tyrannical wrote:To me there seems to be a difference in usage between "Where shall we go to dinner" vs "Where will we go to dinner". When I use shall, I am asking for their opinion on where we should go, as opposed to asking them to predict the future.
Ah. So things change a bit when we shift to the interrogative. That's good information.

I'm far from a grammer or spalling expert, and don't know if I'm right.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
-
FBM
- Ratz' first Gritizen.
- Posts: 45327
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
- About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
-
Contact:
Post
by FBM » Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:14 pm
No worries. I'm just asking for native speakers' intuitive input here.

"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
-
Tyrannical
- Posts: 6468
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
-
Contact:
Post
by Tyrannical » Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:28 pm
It also seems unnatural to say "Shall you pass your test tomorrow?" instead of "Will you pass your test tomorrow?". But both "I shall" and "I will" seem to work as responses.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
-
Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
-
Contact:
Post
by Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:06 pm
Some people like a little elegance to their language.
Ein Ubootsoldat wrote:“Ich melde mich ab. Grüssen Sie bitte meine Kameraden.”
-
Cormac
- Posts: 6415
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:47 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by Cormac » Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:07 pm
Pappa wrote:Unless I was taking the piss, I'd never say "Shall we go". I'd say "Should we go". As for shall/will, I'd always say will.
Of course, "should" has a different meaning than shall and will...
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!
-
Bella Fortuna
- Sister Golden Hair
- Posts: 79685
- Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:45 am
- About me: Being your slave, what should I do but tend
Upon the hours and times of your desire?
I have no precious time at all to spend,
Nor services to do, till you require.
- Location: Scotlifornia
-
Contact:
Post
by Bella Fortuna » Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:09 pm
Bending someone to one's shall just doesn't have the same ring...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest