Which do you commonly use to make a suggestion or when asking for an opinion?
Shall we leave before five?
Will we leave before five?
Shall we leave before five?
Will we leave before five?
which one?
To me, "Shall we leave before five?" is a suggestion (that is, a way of saying "Let's leave before five"), while "Will we leave before five?" is a genuine question asked by somebody who wants to know the answer.
- Kef
- Kef
Instead of "shall" I would say "Should we leave before five?" as a genuine question. Instead of "will" I would say "are we going to leave before five?"
I would probably say "should" rather than "shall", although the two don't seem to mean the same thing entirely.
I agree that in most actual usage today, especially in North America, one would probably find "should" here rather than "shall".
"Should" and "shall" form slightly different questions, though. "Shall we leave before five?" strikes me as a rhetorical question, as if to say, "Let's leave before five", as I stated before. But I would interpret "Should we leave before five?" as a non-rhetorical question, as if to ask, "Would it be a good idea to leave before five?"
In practice, though, the two can be equivalent, in that the two questions would be answered the same way and the answers would have the same meaning. But the intention behind the question itself may be different: one is more of a suggestion and one is more of an actual question, at least to me, though both can be used either way.
"Shall" is more or less antiquated, at least in the U.S., so the question "Shall we leave before five?" is relatively uncommon, but it is still heard.
- Kef
In practice, though, the two can be equivalent, in that the two questions would be answered the same way and the answers would have the same meaning. But the intention behind the question itself may be different: one is more of a suggestion and one is more of an actual question, at least to me, though both can be used either way.
"Shall" is more or less antiquated, at least in the U.S., so the question "Shall we leave before five?" is relatively uncommon, but it is still heard.
- Kef
<"Shall we leave before five?" strikes me as a rhetorical question, as if to say, "Let's leave before five", as I stated before.>
I'd interpret that as "do you think we should leave/isn't it a good idea if we leave before five".
I'd interpret that as "do you think we should leave/isn't it a good idea if we leave before five".
<"Shall" is more or less antiquated, at least in the U.S., so the question "Shall we leave before five?" is relatively uncommon, but it is still heard. >
Being antiquated means that American English does not now have the possibility to distinguish between the use of "shall" and "will". I think that's a shame. American English does have the unfortunate habit of conflating forms. A narrowing of possibilities and distinctions occurs in much AE use.
Being antiquated means that American English does not now have the possibility to distinguish between the use of "shall" and "will". I think that's a shame. American English does have the unfortunate habit of conflating forms. A narrowing of possibilities and distinctions occurs in much AE use.
<< I'd interpret that as "do you think we should leave/isn't it a good idea if we leave before five". >>
Hmm. It's possible that my interpretation is idiosyncratic.
<< Being antiquated means that American English does not now have the possibility to distinguish between the use of "shall" and "will". >>
The distinction is still possible... as I said in the other thread, the difference between "No one shall rescue me" and "No one will rescue me" will still be recognized. But we tend to make such distinctions in other ways.
I don't really see such conflation as a bad thing... whenever one means of expression in a language dies out, another one always pops up. That's why the Newspeak of 1984 will never happen. :)
- Kef
Hmm. It's possible that my interpretation is idiosyncratic.
<< Being antiquated means that American English does not now have the possibility to distinguish between the use of "shall" and "will". >>
The distinction is still possible... as I said in the other thread, the difference between "No one shall rescue me" and "No one will rescue me" will still be recognized. But we tend to make such distinctions in other ways.
I don't really see such conflation as a bad thing... whenever one means of expression in a language dies out, another one always pops up. That's why the Newspeak of 1984 will never happen. :)
- Kef
<I don't really see such conflation as a bad thing... whenever one means of expression in a language dies out, another one always pops up. >
What popped up to replace "shall"?
What popped up to replace "shall"?