| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:24 pm
Post subject: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
My grandmother often used 'should' as a pure conditional, where most
(British) English speakers I know use 'would' - I should like a cup of
tea, I should be honoured, etc. Most modern usage has 'should' implying
some kind of imperative.
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing anachronisms, as
it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in daily use. However, the
other day I heard a man from the one of the US Southern States use it.
Is it still in common daily use there, or elsewhere in the
English-speaking world?
If so, are there rules for differentiating 'should' and 'would'? For
example, "I should rather have one than the other" sounds wrong, for
some reason.
Rich
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Harvey Van Sickle
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:37 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
On 18 Oct 2005, wrote
| Quote: | My grandmother often used 'should' as a pure conditional, where
most (British) English speakers I know use 'would' - I should like
a cup of tea, I should be honoured, etc. Most modern usage has
'should' implying some kind of imperative.
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing
anachronisms, as it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in
daily use. However, the other day I heard a man from the one of
the US Southern States use it. Is it still in common daily use
there, or elsewhere in the English-speaking world?
If so, are there rules for differentiating 'should' and 'would'?
For example, "I should rather have one than the other" sounds
wrong, for some reason.
|
Burchfield says that "should" is normally used in "standard southern
BrE" before verbs of liking (e.g., be glad, be inclined, care, like,
prefer", and also in tentative statements of opinion (guess, imagine,
say, think). He doesn't mention any decline in its use, but seems
careful to identify it as a southern usage.
I think "I should like" sounds formal because it uses the full word
rather than a contraction: if someone says "I'd like a cup of tea" or
"I'd be honoured", how can you tell if they're using "should" or
"would" in their own mind?
--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
| Quote: | On 18 Oct 2005, wrote
My grandmother often used 'should' as a pure conditional, where
most (British) English speakers I know use 'would' - I should like
a cup of tea, I should be honoured, etc. Most modern usage has
'should' implying some kind of imperative.
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing
anachronisms, as it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in
daily use. However, the other day I heard a man from the one of
the US Southern States use it. Is it still in common daily use
there, or elsewhere in the English-speaking world?
If so, are there rules for differentiating 'should' and 'would'?
For example, "I should rather have one than the other" sounds
wrong, for some reason.
Burchfield says that "should" is normally used in "standard southern
BrE" before verbs of liking (e.g., be glad, be inclined, care, like,
prefer", and also in tentative statements of opinion (guess, imagine,
say, think). He doesn't mention any decline in its use, but seems
careful to identify it as a southern usage.
|
That's strange, as my grandmother was from the northern Midlands -
unless southern British means English. Or it may have been a 'polite'
affectation, of course.
| Quote: | I think "I should like" sounds formal because it uses the full word
rather than a contraction: if someone says "I'd like a cup of tea" or
"I'd be honoured", how can you tell if they're using "should" or
"would" in their own mind?
|
I have no idea what's going on in their minds, of course - but whenever
it's made explicit it is invariably would, rather than should.
For example, when emphasising that they really *would* like a cup of
tea and aren't just being polite, answering "care for a cup of tea?"
with "yes, I would", or posing the question "would you like a cup of
tea?"
All this talk of tea, I'd love a cuppa now - wouldn't you?
:P
Rich
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CDB
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:02 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
<rlancashire@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129634294.317273.290300@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[...]
| Quote: | If so, are there rules for differentiating 'should' and 'would'?
For example, "I should rather have one than the other" sounds
wrong, for some reason.
|
[...]
For conditional and associated uses of "should" and "would", I should
think the rule is the same one as for simple future "shall" and
"will". Roughly speaking, I and we shall and should; you, he, she,
it, and they will and would. As you noted, it's not universally
observed. Even my Fowler (Modern English Usage, Second Edition),
which has a longish article on the subject, seems resigned to its
decay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baldycotton
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:30 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
On 18 Oct 2005 00:24:33 -0700, rlancashire@hotmail.com wrote:
| Quote: | I generally considered this to be one of her endearing anachronisms, as
it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in daily use.
|
Exactly my thoughts. I'm sure I've heard it often in old British
movies.
OTOH, I still often use, and hear such phrases as:
"Are you ready for another glass of beer?"
"I should think so!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robin Bignall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:39 am
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:30:59 GMT, baldycotton <baldycotton2@mchsi.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On 18 Oct 2005 00:24:33 -0700, rlancashire@hotmail.com wrote:
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing anachronisms, as
it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in daily use.
Exactly my thoughts. I'm sure I've heard it often in old British
movies.
OTOH, I still often use, and hear such phrases as:
"Are you ready for another glass of beer?"
"I should think so!"
|
That often was "I should say so!" in BrE of Bertie Wooster's time, and
is an idiom that means an enthusiastic "Yes, please".
--
Robin
Hoddesdon, England |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joe Higman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 4:26 am
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
"Robin Bignall" <docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:7kqal1les47chn83ab9ba1j4pkhq8joa1o@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:30:59 GMT, baldycotton <baldycotton2@mchsi.com
wrote:
On 18 Oct 2005 00:24:33 -0700, rlancashire@hotmail.com wrote:
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing anachronisms, as
it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in daily use.
Exactly my thoughts. I'm sure I've heard it often in old British
movies.
OTOH, I still often use, and hear such phrases as:
"Are you ready for another glass of beer?"
"I should think so!"
That often was "I should say so!" in BrE of Bertie Wooster's time, and
is an idiom that means an enthusiastic "Yes, please".
--
|
And also the disbelieving "I should koko". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
"Robin Bignall" <docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote...
| Quote: | baldycotton <baldycotton2@mchsi.com> wrote:
rlancashire@hotmail.com wrote:
I generally considered this to be one of her endearing anachronisms,
as it sounds old-fashioned and I don't hear it in daily use.
Exactly my thoughts. I'm sure I've heard it often in old British
movies.
OTOH, I still often use, and hear such phrases as:
"Are you ready for another glass of beer?"
"I should think so!"
That often was "I should say so!" in BrE of Bertie Wooster's time, and
is an idiom that means an enthusiastic "Yes, please".
|
This pair should really be distinguished. In that context, "I should
think so!" means "And about bloody time too!"/"What kept you?", whilst
"I should say so!" means "Absolutely!"/"Excellent idea!"
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baldycotton
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:35 pm
Post subject: Re: Obsolete conditionals |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:16:18 +0100, "Matti Lamprhey"
<matti@official-totally-reversed.com> wrote:
| Quote: | This pair should really be distinguished. In that context, "I should
think so!" means "And about bloody time too!"/"What kept you?", whilst
"I should say so!" means "Absolutely!"/"Excellent idea!"
|
Good examples of how subtle the English language is... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in