Results 1 to 10 of 78

Thread: shall

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. Senior Member
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Arabic
      • Home Country:
      • Egypt
      • Current Location:
      • Egypt

    • Join Date: Nov 2008
    • Posts: 519
    #1

    shall

    the past tense of shall

  2. Key Member
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Jun 2009
    • Posts: 1,516
    #2

    Re: shall

    Quote Originally Posted by sash2008 View Post
    the past tense of shall
    My opinion: should

    PS: I know there may be yelling and screaming - I want to learn it !!


    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 2,036
    #3

    Re: shall

    Quote Originally Posted by ymnisky View Post
    My opinion: should

    PS: I know there may be yelling and screaming - I want to learn it !!

    I dont' consider it a logical or practical notion to take "should" as the past of "shall". In American English, the use of "shall" is rather limited. In a number of ways, "would" functions as the past of "will", but I wouldn't say the same thing about "should" and "shall".





    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 392
    #4

    Re: shall

    I agree with what PROESL wrote. In terms of actual meaning, the modal shall effectively has no past tense form because it has a meaning that is fundamentally tied to the future. And if it does, it sure as heck isn't should, which has little to do with shall in terms of meaning.

    Would fills the bill rather nicely as a past tense version of shall in some situations. For example:

    John: "I shall love you always, Mary."
    Mary: "John said he would love me always."


    Greg

    P.S. No yelling and screaming...yet.
    Last edited by dragn; 02-Sep-2009 at 19:53.


    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 2,036
    #5

    Re: shall

    Quote Originally Posted by dragn View Post
    I agree with what PROESL wrote. In terms of actual meaning, the modal shall effectively has no past tense form because it has a meaning that is fundamentally tied to the future. And if it does, it sure as heck isn't should, which has little to do with shall in terms of meaning.

    Would fills the bill rather nicely as a past tense version of shall in some situations. For example:

    John: "I shall love you always, Mary."
    Mary: "John said he would love me always."

    Greg

    P.S. No yelling and screaming...yet.
    We could add that we often use "should" with a future time reference.

    I should call her again tomorrow.

    She should call me back by next Tuesday.

  3. Key Member
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Jun 2009
    • Posts: 1,516
    #6

    Re: shall

    I completely agree with you two PROESL and dragn. And I understand quite well your explanations - mainly regarding modern AmE usage. But something inner myself keeps telling me there is much more to be digged here.
    I am talking about the ancient sources of the structure of the language - the classical old English.

    Dragn: Let us invert the situation. In the example you gave, if you first presented Mary's sentence:
    Mary: "John said he would love me always."
    would one ever think maybe John had such a special care of using shall ?


    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 2,036
    #7

    Re: shall

    This should help shed some light on the topic. In my opinion, the "traditional rules" for "shall" were fabricated by prescriptivist grammarians bent on telling people how to use English rather than observing how people actually use English. I've read this usage note before, and quite honestly, it's just given me a headache.

    One thing that is certain about "shall" is that it is more formal. In US English one can observe "shall" in legal documents and very formal business language. Other places "shall" seems to appear is in fixed or semi-fixed phrases such as "Shall we leave?" "Shall we dance?"

    I doubt the "traditional rules" for "shall and will" were ever traditional at all in the first place, except for among those willing to prescribe to an imposed sense of language propriety.



    shall: Definition from Answers.com


    USAGE NOTE The traditional rules for using shall and will prescribe a highly complicated pattern of use in which the meanings of the forms change according to the person of the subject. In the first person, shall is used to indicate simple futurity: I shall (not will) have to buy another ticket. In the second and third persons, the same sense of futurity is expressed by will: The comet will (not shall) return in 87 years. You will (not shall) probably encounter some heavy seas when you round the point. The use of will in the first person and of shall in the second and third may express determination, promise, obligation, or permission, depending on the context. Thus I will leave tomorrow indicates that the speaker is determined to leave; You and she shall leave tomorrow is likely to be interpreted as a command. The sentence You shall have your money expresses a promise (“I will see that you get your money”), whereas You will have your money makes a simple prediction. • Such, at least, are the traditional rules. The English and some traditionalists about usage are probably the only people who follow these rules, and then not with perfect consistency. In America, people who try to adhere to them run the risk of sounding pretentious or haughty. Americans normally use will to express most of the senses reserved for shall in English usage. Americans use shall chiefly in first person invitations and questions that request an opinion or agreement, such as Shall we go? and in certain fixed expressions, such as We shall overcome. In formal style, Americans use shall to express an explicit obligation, as in Applicants shall provide a proof of residence, though this sense is also expressed by must or should. In speech the distinction that the English signal by the choice of shall or will may be rendered by stressing the auxiliary, as in I will leave tomorrow (“I intend to leave”); by choosing another auxiliary, such as must or have to; or by using an adverb such as certainly. • In addition to its sense of obligation, shall also can convey high moral seriousness that derives in part from its extensive use in the King James Bible, as in “Righteousness shall go before him and shall set us in the way of his steps” (Ps 85:13) and “He that shall humble himself shall be exalted” (Mt 23:12). The prophetic overtones that shall bears with it have no doubt led to its use in some of the loftiest rhetoric in English. This may be why Lincoln chose to use it instead of will in the Gettysburg Address:“government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” See Usage Notes at should.


    • Join Date: Sep 2009
    • Posts: 422
    #8

    Re: shall

    Quote Originally Posted by dragn View Post
    I agree with what PROESL wrote. In terms of actual meaning, the modal shall effectively has no past tense form because it has a meaning that is fundamentally tied to the future. And if it does, it sure as heck isn't should, which has little to do with shall in terms of meaning.

    Would fills the bill rather nicely as a past tense version of shall in some situations. For example:

    John: "I shall love you always, Mary."
    Mary: "John said he would love me always."


    Greg
    Hi Greg. How's Taipei?

    Your statement above, where you say that "Would fills the bill rather nicely as a past tense version of shall", isn't an example having anything to do with past tense.

    It's merely a past tense FORM being used to denote reported/indirect speech. In the case of modal verbs, it's the HISTORICAL past tense FORM that's used.

    The reason that it's so hard to make 'should' act as the past tense of 'shall' is that both verbs are tenseless, in fact, all modal verbs in modern day English are tenseless.

    All the modals are used in past, present and future situations so effectively, there are no tensed modals in modern English.

  4. Key Member
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Jun 2009
    • Posts: 1,516
    #9

    Re: shall

    Quote Originally Posted by PROESL View Post
    I've read this usage note before, and quite honestly, it's just given me a headache.
    I haven't had enough time to read through all those references yet. But I can say that rereading all the posts in this thread is beginning to give me a headache!

    Quote Originally Posted by albeit View Post
    Doesn't anyone find it odd that dictionaries often state that X is the past tense of Y but they never give any example sentences?
    It is not that easy to write a dictionary - we must appreciate their effort. Besides there are dictionaries and dictionaries.

    Quote Originally Posted by albeit View Post
    While this may be hard to grasp for many people, dictionaries and grammar manuals have always contained quite a large number of mistaken information about language.
    Some people give all their lifetime to write such dictionaries and manuals, that is not an easy task.


    Quote Originally Posted by bhaisahab View Post
    "I shall have been married for ten years next month", but it's a very archaic usage and not likely to be encountered outside literature.
    I keep hearing it all the time, but people say it so quickly - "I'll have been married for ten years next month". (I am kidding, but that is a point:
    the contracted form I'll is the same for 'I will' and 'I shall', right? I guess only in the negative it changes - won't or shan't.)
    Last edited by Abstract Idea; 06-Sep-2009 at 12:20.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •