New-York tribune., 1900-12-23
WILL AND SHALL.

! reader of The Tribune calls our attention
to a recent article in which will" was wrongly
used for shall" We are obliged to him, and
regret the error. but its occurrence even in our
own columns is not a miracle. The most care
full supervision cannot always save newspaper,
necessarily made in haste, from mistakes which
anybody may detect at leisure. and which are
pretty sure to catch the editors eye and vex
his soul when he sees the printed sheet More
over. the so-called English auxiiaries set many
traps fnto which the unwary are likely to fall,
and which unhappily multitude of highly in
teIligent persons are utterly unable to avoid. A
Yale professor, who of course, had excellent
opportunities to observe the linguistic habits Of
young men brought up in all parts Of the coun-
try was wont to say that nobody born west Of
the Hudson River could distinguish the differ
ence between will" and SHALL" and that In
consequence a large majority of the people of
the United States used those words without dis
elimination, not knowing or, he was sorry to
say, much caring whether they were accidental
ly right or wrong He expected that before
long the distinction would be wholly lost, being
convinced that there was no way to avert what
he deemed a great misfortune. Doubtless his
geographical limitation too strict, but his
apprehension was not foolish. 1t has been
shared by many observers, including Richard
Grant White and since his time the tendency
which he deplored has steadily increased.
1t should be said, however, that incompetence
to distinguish between will" and SHALL" and
of course, between would" and should" which
are far more troublesome to those whose
auxiliary sense, If we may employ that defini-
ton, is deficient Is a for pity rather than
for reproach. 1t seems to be question of in
tuition, unconsciously derived from early as
49,
ing clear, complete and infallible. We are con-
fident that thousands o. Ill educated New-Eng-
landers go through life without ever making a
mistake In the of those words or knowing
why they use them correctly, or indeed giving
the subject a moments thought; and that a far
larger number of Americans having an admi-
rable command Of the vernacuar are habituaIly
right or wrong, as the case may be- by mere
chance, being incapable of determining in ad-
vance which word should be chosen or of judg-
ing afterward whether their choice was proper
or improper
With the lapse of years the English language
has had many irksome shackles stricken off,
and 1t makes noble Of its growing freedom.
But we cannot think that its auxiliary verbs
establish restraints which need to be removed.
In our view they are, on the contrary, ex-
quisitely adapted, If not absolutely essential to
the purpose of expressing delicate shades of
meaning, which may, indeed be gathered from
the context without them, but which, neverthe-
less may fairly claim to be made visible in
writing and audible in speech. Yet we, too, fear
that the distinctions which these words still
preserve to the consciousness of many are
doomed to disappear, and that in the not dis
tant future some unworthy inheritors Of their
mother tongue will even have the audacity to
shout in triumph, 1--WE mixed those children
up and not n creature knew itr'