...what would happen if we should begin...

[ZdenSvk]

Hello,
While reading Seneca's 5th letter I found this strange conditional sentence.

Quote: "The mere name of philosophy, however quietly pursued, is an object of sufficient scorn; and what would happen if we should begin to separate ourselves from the customs of our fellow-men?"

I understand that is is a question about conditional sentence: "If we begin to separate, we will be, as philosophers, scorn even more". I understand the auxiliary verb "would", meaning here "what is the likelihood of happening...". But what about should? I don't remember ever seeing it used like that. Is this usage common or not? Can anybody explain its usage here?

Have a nice
Zdenko

 

[Barque]

...and what would happen if we happen to begin to start to separate ourselves...

It's formal usage and possibly a little old-fashioned.

 

[probus]

Typo alert @ZdenSvk: scorned, not scorn.

As far as AmE is concerned I agree with @Barque: should is no longer used in such contexts, having been supplanted by would. BrE may be different.

 

[5jj]

and what would happen if we should begin to separate ourselves from the customs of our fellow-men?"

That is perfectly acceptable, if perhaps a little formal. The 'should' can be omitted, but not replaced by 'would'.

 

[5jj]

There is a well-known poem by Rupert Brooke that begins:

If I should die, think only this of me:
That there’s some corner of a foreign field
That is for ever England.

The Soldier by Rupert Brooke | Poetry Magazine

If I should die, think only this of me:

www.poetryfoundation.org

 

[teechar]

It is still in use in BrE and some other varieties. See also:

Learning English | BBC World Service