The future progressive--definite/indefinite plans?

[diamondcutter]

I read this in Practical English Usage (4[SUP]th[/SUP] edition), Michael Swan.

The future progressive is often used to refer to future events which are fixed or decided, or which are expected to happen in the normal course of events.

Professor Baxter will be giving another lecture on Roman glass-making at the same time next week.
I’ll be seeing you one of these days, I expect.

This is useful if we want to show that we are not talking about making decisions, but about things that will happen ‘anyway’.
‘Shall I pick up the laundry for you?’
‘Oh, no, don’t make a special journey.
‘It’s OK. I’ll be going to the shops anyway.’

And I read this in The Grammar Book--An ESL/EFL Teacher’s Course (2rd edition), Marianne Celce-Murcia and Diane Larsen-Freeman.

Simple Future versus Future Progressive
The future progressive allows for the possibility of change with regard to some future event:
We’ll go to Everglades National Park on our vacation. (definite plan)
We’ll be going to Everglades National Park on our vacation. (less definite in that it allows for a change in plans; i.e. We’ll be going to Everglades National Park unless we run out of time.)
We will offer that class next semester. (more definite)
We will be offering that class next semester. (more tentative in that it allows for change--i.e. its cancellation if not enough students enroll in it)

I think what Swan means is that the future progressive expresses definite plans while what the authors of The Grammar Book mean is that the future progressive indicates indefinite plans. If my understanding is correct, how do you explain the difference? Is that a difference between British and American Englishes? I think Swan is British and the authors of the second book are American.

 

[probus]

As a speaker of AmE I disagree with the authors of The Grammar Book. There is nothing less definite about "We'll be going to Everglades ...". I can't offer an opinion on BrE.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

This American also strongly disagrees with Swan. Neither is more definite than the other.

What isn't definite about "We'll be going"? It's short for "We will be going." It's the opposite of "We won't be going."

Here are some less definite ways of saying it:

- "We'll probably be going."
- "We might be going."
- "We're considering going."
- "We're thinking about going."
- "We haven't ruled out going."
- "We'll be going if we have enough time and money and none of the kids get carsick."

 

[Tdol]

If it will happen anyway, how is that such a definite plan?

 

[jutfrank]

I'm in agreement with Swan. That's similar to how I usually how I teach it too.

I'm reluctant to disagree with what Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman say but I've never thought of it like that and am not convinced by their examples, especially the Everglades one. In my view, the key part of the use that both authors are trying to get at is that the future event has been fixed, and at at the moment of utterance is not considered to be open for rescheduling. I think the reason that teachers and writers use the word 'schedule' rather than 'arrangement' is that the arrangement has been 'finalised' in some sense.

I don't think there's a significant difference between varieties.