 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / March 2008BrE: You know one should/would not like it
Hello: I wonder what is the preference in prescriptive/traditional BrE in: "You know one should/would not like to have" Is it the "should" or the "would?" How about today? I found samples of both: -------- But she answered gaily, " You know one would not like to have a booby for a lover." The Howdie and Other Tales by John Galt - Scotland - 1923 ------- ... narrow lanes scratching his carriage, and you know one should not like to have dear Sir Thomas when he comes home, find all the varnish scratched off. ... Mansfield park - Page 69 by Jane Austen - 1833 -------- I'm quite sure in AmE is only "would," but perhaps I'm wrong ... Thanks. Marius Hancu > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Thanks. > Marius Hancu There may be regional or class differences but basically they're interchangeable and neither is prescribed or preferred AFAICT. > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > I'm quite sure in AmE is only "would," but perhaps I'm wrong ... To me "would" seems much more natural (in modern BrE) than "should", but I can believe that it might have been different in Jane Austen's day.  Signatureathel >> Hello: >> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >but I can believe that it might have been different in Jane Austen's >day. It's a slippery one, this. I can't remember, without looking it up, who's speaking here -- Mrs Norris? If so, it may be an over-correction: that is, she's thinking "I should" and substituting what she believes to be the more refined "one" while keeping the verb the same. Jane Austen uses this sort of minutely detailed subtlety to pick out the fine shades of her character's personalities. I can't guarantee this particular case, but in general you'll appreciate that what her characters say isn't necessarily the best or most correct English of the day. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ > >> ------- > >> ... narrow lanes scratching his carriage, and you know one should not > >> like to have dear Sir Thomas when he comes home, find all the varnish > >> scratched off. ... > It's a slippery one, this. I can't remember, without looking it up, > who's speaking here -- Mrs Norris? You're right on the mark:-) >If so, it may be an over-correction You may be right, and I understand your thinking and I agree, but if I assume this to be a case of Fowler's "coloured future," then "should" could be the **recommended/best** form. ------- The Coloured-Future System In future and conditional statements that include (without the use of special words for the purpose) an expression of the speaker's (not necessarily of the subject's) wish, intention, menace, assurance, consent, refusal, promise, offer, permission, command, &c.--in such sentences the first person has W.[Will/Should], the second and third persons Sh.[Shall/Should] H.W. Fowler, The King's English http://www.bartleby.com/116/213.html#2 ----- Trouble is, many times I can't tell if the context is "emotional enough" to be considered as a coloured future or not:-) So, I know the rules, but I don't quite know when and which of them to apply:-) Thus, my question is: what do you think the **best prescribed** answer would have been in Austen's or today's time? "Would" or "should?":-) Thanks. Marius Hancu >>>> ------- >>>> ... narrow lanes scratching his carriage, and you know one should [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > "Would" or "should?":-) For today, I'd say "would" in both because "one" is third-person, and neither speaker means "ought". I have no doubt that Katy's right about the second one being "should" because the speaker actually means "one" as the self-deprecatory substitute for "I", but it would be an error today, and, I rather think, in those days too. SignatureMike. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> >> ------- >> >> ... narrow lanes scratching his carriage, and you know one should not [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > >"Would" or "should?":-) Oh, dear. Could someone pass me that time machine? Really, I don't think there's an absolute, incontrovertible answer: it's down to hunch, and feel for language, and instinct, and experience. I think I still come down on the side of "would", but I wouldn't stake my life on it. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>> Hello: >>> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >what her characters say isn't necessarily the best or most correct >English of the day. I think that's exactly right; it's characteristic of the person speaking, as is the rest of the phrase (that "one should not like" is very nanny-ish, in the worst sense). Of course, in modern English, one - there I go - would be likely to say "I would not like" rather than "I should not like", but that was definitely different in Jane Austen's day. The use with the third person is idiosyncratic (didn't we have some examples of it in reported speech, or reported thought, in Samual Butler?). Katy (the other one) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.