-
Exciting news! With our new Ad-Free Premium Subscription you can enjoy a distraction-free browsing experience while supporting our site's growth. Without ads, you have less distractions and enjoy faster page load times. Upgrade is optional. Find out more here, and enjoy ad-free learning with us!
Will or will be?
- Thread starter glov
- Start date
- Status
banderas
Key Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- Polish
- Home Country
- Poland
- Current Location
- UK
Do not disturb me between 2 and 3. I will be sending the paperwork then.
I will have lunch at 2 and then I will send the paperwork.
I don't think that using 'will be sending' is so much an issue of a continuing action, Banderas. Using this form makes it just a bit lighter, more casual, less perfunctory.
We could use the present continuous, "I'm sending the paperwork" for a near future but it seems to "demand" a time adverb lest it be confused with a present continuous of right now.
"I will send the paperwork"
Statement of bald fact. Paperwork is probably completed.
"I will be sending the paperwork."
Use this tense when some further action is involved eg
"I will be sending the paperwork as soon as it has been completed.'
Statement of bald fact. Paperwork is probably completed.
"I will be sending the paperwork."
Use this tense when some further action is involved eg
"I will be sending the paperwork as soon as it has been completed.'
Your 'probably' makes your distinction suspect, David. Neither form speaks to whether the 'work' is done or not.
What percentages might those be, David?
I don't have any agenda. Seeking the truth about language can hardly be called an agenda.
I'm more than willing to hear any reasoned argument in support of your idea or for that matter, any idea on language. If it's supported by how people actually use language then we know we're well on our way.
It wasn't me who dropped your argument. You yourself knocked the pins out from under your distinction. I merely pointed it out.
Now we're left with what I suggested and it's certainly possible that there is a better explanation(s), but we know that the 'ing' forms are more friendly, more casual.
naomimalan
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Member Type
- English Teacher
Yes, as you say Riverkid, we can’t use the present continuous here without a time adverb.
So we have to fall back on going to send, will send or will be sending.
-I think in this context, a business one, going to send doesn’t sound very businesslike: it implies (as Thomson and Martinet put it*) an action that is “very likely to be performed though there is not the same idea of definite future arrangement that we get from the present continuous.”
-Will send implies only an unpremeditated intention, which is also not very businesslike in this context.
So we’re left with will be sending which, as Michael Swan points out**, can be used “to suggest that something in the future has already been fixed or decided.”:-D:-D
*A.J.Thomson and A.V. Martinet, “A Practical English Grammar”, Fourth Edition, 204 and 205
**Practical English Usage”, Michael Swan, OUP 1988, 256
Last edited:
naomimalan
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Member Type
- English Teacher
Originally Posted by naomimalan
Yes, as you say Riverkid, we can’t use the present continuous here without a time adverb.
Good points, Naomi. There seems to be quite a difference between what would be acceptable for business in the UK compared to that of NA. I'm not completely sure of what you mean by "sound very businesslike". Is this a measure related to politeness or functionality?
I meant functionality.
So we have to fall back on going to send, will send or will be sending.
-I think in this context, a business one, going to send doesn’t sound very businesslike: it implies (as Thomson and Martinet put it*) an action that is “very likely to be performed though there is not the same idea of definite future arrangement that we get from the present continuous.”
-Will send implies only an unpremeditated intention, which is also not very businesslike in this context.
I'm not sure if they have something specific in mind as to these differences but "be going to" can be very definite. 'will' can also carry a meaning of determination. I think that the context would be important; is this an introductory email/letter telling of a future shipment or is it a phone conversation confirming the shipment. That could shift a simple future marking 'will' to a 'will' of determination.
You’ve definitely got a point there, Riverside. I hadn’t thought about the possibility of its being within the context of a phone conversation. Yes, obviously that would make ‘going to’ and ‘will’ + infinitive perfectly acceptable (I think I would prefer to call it a ‘will’ corresponding to a promise rather than a ‘will’ of determination but it comes to the same thing ultimately.)
I'm going to send these on Friday. / I'll send these on Friday / I'll be sending these on Friday. / ?I'm sending these on Friday. ?
I'm not sure that the present continuous for the future is the best one for this type of situation if it is a "quickly" decided thought. It works well for, and is in common use for scheduled things, as in,
I'm playing tennis on Friday.
I totally agree. In fact though, I was talking about the original statement, where there wasn’t the time clause. I was also thinking in terms of a letter/email. But I quite agree that within the context of a telephone conversation where a “quickly” decided thought is plausible, the present continuous would definitely not be an option if indeed it was a case of a 'quickly decided thought'.
So we’re left with will be sending which, as Michael Swan points out**, can be used “to suggest that something in the future has already been fixed or decided.”I can see this in,
I'll be going to London. versus I will go to London. But with the addition of a time adverb,
I'll be going to London on Friday. versus I will go to London on Friday, is there really that difference that Mr Swan spoke of.
Here, I beg to differ and to side with Michael Swan. For me, “I will go to London on Friday” would correspond to an unpremeditated decision or “quickly” decided thought, as you term it but for me there’s nothing ‘quickly decided’ about “I'll be going to London on Friday.”
This nuance is tough stuff, ain't it?
I’m with you there ! :-D:-D
Yes, as you say Riverkid, we can’t use the present continuous here without a time adverb.
Good points, Naomi. There seems to be quite a difference between what would be acceptable for business in the UK compared to that of NA. I'm not completely sure of what you mean by "sound very businesslike". Is this a measure related to politeness or functionality?
I meant functionality.
So we have to fall back on going to send, will send or will be sending.
-I think in this context, a business one, going to send doesn’t sound very businesslike: it implies (as Thomson and Martinet put it*) an action that is “very likely to be performed though there is not the same idea of definite future arrangement that we get from the present continuous.”
-Will send implies only an unpremeditated intention, which is also not very businesslike in this context.
I'm not sure if they have something specific in mind as to these differences but "be going to" can be very definite. 'will' can also carry a meaning of determination. I think that the context would be important; is this an introductory email/letter telling of a future shipment or is it a phone conversation confirming the shipment. That could shift a simple future marking 'will' to a 'will' of determination.
You’ve definitely got a point there, Riverside. I hadn’t thought about the possibility of its being within the context of a phone conversation. Yes, obviously that would make ‘going to’ and ‘will’ + infinitive perfectly acceptable (I think I would prefer to call it a ‘will’ corresponding to a promise rather than a ‘will’ of determination but it comes to the same thing ultimately.)
I'm going to send these on Friday. / I'll send these on Friday / I'll be sending these on Friday. / ?I'm sending these on Friday. ?
I'm not sure that the present continuous for the future is the best one for this type of situation if it is a "quickly" decided thought. It works well for, and is in common use for scheduled things, as in,
I'm playing tennis on Friday.
I totally agree. In fact though, I was talking about the original statement, where there wasn’t the time clause. I was also thinking in terms of a letter/email. But I quite agree that within the context of a telephone conversation where a “quickly” decided thought is plausible, the present continuous would definitely not be an option if indeed it was a case of a 'quickly decided thought'.
So we’re left with will be sending which, as Michael Swan points out**, can be used “to suggest that something in the future has already been fixed or decided.”I can see this in,
I'll be going to London. versus I will go to London. But with the addition of a time adverb,
I'll be going to London on Friday. versus I will go to London on Friday, is there really that difference that Mr Swan spoke of.
Here, I beg to differ and to side with Michael Swan. For me, “I will go to London on Friday” would correspond to an unpremeditated decision or “quickly” decided thought, as you term it but for me there’s nothing ‘quickly decided’ about “I'll be going to London on Friday.”
This nuance is tough stuff, ain't it?
I’m with you there ! :-D:-D
- Status