Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Should in place of would???

"I *should* say nothing about it, if I were you."
It looks like "should" is used as a stressed "would". Am I right?
Kiuhnm

 It looks like "should" is used as a stressed "would". Am I right?
No one? You are granted the right to be wrong so don't worry.
Kiuhnm

 No one? You are granted the right to be wrong so don't worry.
You are wrong on both posts. But, I'll only address the second post. I'm not 
sure if you should be excused for a lack of understanding of English, or if 
you really need to be told that you are not in a position to grant anything 
to anyone here.
I can't speak for others, but personally I don't have respect for someone 
who asks banale questions and then responds  with an attitude of arrogance 
to answers from those intending to help. It is true that some people can get 
away with being brusque and direct by virture of the power of their 
intelligence, but you are far from the qualifications that would bestow that 
privilege. You need to learn first the humility of your talent, if you want 
to learn other things, such as to understand English well. 



Not really. It's a Britishism; Brits say "I should like to speak with you." 
Americans say "I'd (I would) like to speak with you."
When an American says "I should" it implies a near obligation.
"I should speak with you. You need to know something."
-- 
Joey DoWop Dee
Remember: It is To Laugh.

 to learn other things, such as to understand English well. 
I think you are the one who is quite arrogant and that doesn't like to 
be contradicted. I almost forgot! In the thread "was/were" I really 
mistreated you! Sorry if I haven't kissed your shoes.
Kiuhnm
P.S. Max should be quite annoyed by now, but not offended, I hope!
If you are, let me know: it wasn't my intention.

 "I should speak with you. You need to know something."
Ok, thanks.
Kiuhnm

 mistreated you! Sorry if I haven't kissed your shoes.
Non mi ricordo se hai provato a trattarmi male, mi ricordo solo che non hai
capito un tubo in qualche thread. Mi lamento invece che vedo spesso che
scrivi stupidaggnini quando gli altri provano a aiutarti. In ogni caso, non
è necessario che tu baci le scarpe, è necessario solo che tu cresca e
diventi un uomo vero.

 diventi un uomo vero.
In italiano la chiamiamo "coda di paglia". E' un difetto molto difficile 
da perdere quindi spero vivamente che anche tu debba finire di crescere 
e maturare.
Passando all'italiano hai privato questa discussione dell'unica parvenza 
di utilità che aveva, quindi passo e chiudo.
Kiuhnm

 maturare.
That's a delightful expression and very apropos for Italian culture. We 
would characterize things instead with the expression 'I don't suffer fools 
gladly'. However, I see that already your behavior is changing and I am 
pleased. Who says that there's no place in the modern world for corporal 
punishment? Let's hope we can all continue to share our knowledge without 
the necessity for these diversions in the future. 

 pleased.
You should be indeed. It means you have experienced a severe boost in 
comprehension. I hope it is an achievement of yours and not just me 
having lost all my verve.
Kiuhnm

 lost all my verve.
Regarding the content of your post, I'll generously dismiss it as the final
flaps and flails of a fish out of water (if a fish could flail). I will,
however, offer some help with your English in the hope that you'll be
appreciative.
I would suggest that you not use 'severe' but instead use 'significant' or
some other more appropriate adjective. 'Severe' has a connotation of 'duro e 
grave' which doesn't fit with 'comprehension' and would mark you as not a
native speaker or at least as someone not facile with English phraseology.
'Verve' is also an interesting choice. It's not incorrect, but it is a bit
unusal in this situation. Perhaps that's the case because of the
pervasiveness of the phrase 'lost all my nerve' (which means to have lost
one's confidence) and the concomitant ambiguity that hearing it might elicit
in the listener's perception. A colorful colloquial alternative would be
'spunk' but that also has a slang meaning that is quite vulgar. A more
mainstream choice would be 'spirit' or 'pluck'.

 mainstream choice would be 'spirit' or 'pluck'.
I should have said "linguistic verve".
Kiuhnm

 boost of comprehension". I thought it was interesting :-)
It's interesting to me to see the situations in which many Italians use the
word 'ironic'. I can only assume that the meaning of 'ironico' is much
broader than the English word 'ironic.' We'll have to look to some Italian
writer to enlighten us on that point. In any case, 'severe boost of power'
doesn't fare much better as a word choice, even if it is understandable to
the average listener. 'Severe' has a definite negative connotation. It is
more likely to be used if you're talking about some safeguarding device that
might come into play because of some severe condition, that I suppose could
be a boost of power. Perhaps the Italian word 'severo' might lead an Italian
writing in English to use 'severe' in situations that a native speaker
wouldn't choose. There is an Italian name Severo, but I doubt that someone
would name their child Severe in English (Weasel yes, Severe no) I know that
I'm probably belaboring the point, but these fine points of connotation have
impinged on my mind for quite a few years now, and I hate to admit that I
find them interesting.

 would name their child Severe in English (Weasel yes, Severe no)
There's a "Severus" in the Harry Potter books, and a "Severian" in the
Book of the New
Sun. I don't think either can be regarded as a remotely normal name,
though.

 It looks like "should" is used as a stressed "would". Am I right?
There's a (south-eastern) UK usage which involves saying "shall" and
"should" instead
of "will" and "would" in the first person singular and plural. The
French archaeologist
in the first Indiana Jones film says "I should very much like to see
you in it" (talking
about a dress). He doesn't mean that he "ought to" like seeing her in
the dress.
It's an example of this first person thing.
I believe you can find very hard to understand explanations of shall/
will
and should/would in books. If you said "I would say nothing about it
if I
were you" no-one could fault you. Native English speakers outside the
SE
of England, and many in the SE of England, would say the same. Perhaps
if you're writing dialogue for English aristocrats in a play set in
the 1930s or
earlier you should read up on the shall/will, should/would stuff.

 will
Sě, perň delle spiegazioni sono state tentate, se ne era parlato. 
Se a K. interessa, puň cercare nell'archivio di icling su GG.
-- 
"And the whole Earth was of one language, and of one speech". 
(Genesis 11,1)

 be a boost of power.
Ok, thanks, I'll keep that in mind.
Kiuhnm

 earlier you should read up on the shall/will, should/would stuff.
The only thing I know about shall/will is that I could say:
"Let's go to the theatre, shall we?"
"You shall do as I say!"
"Please give me a hand, will you?"
"If you want I can help you, shall I?"
"We could take it, shall we?"
Or something like that. I'm not extra-sure about those sentences.
Kiuhnm

Adam Atkinson wrote:


http://snipurl.com/1jbaj
E anche grazie a lui se ora stiamo conversando.


My friend David (Oxford born, London educated, extremely learned
person) says "shall" and "should" but I have other friends from the
south who say "will" and "would". When I was at "scuole medie" (yes,
it was AFTER the second world war) text books still had "shall" for
1st and 3rd person singular future, and I remember looking at an
ancient grammar book belonging to my aunt which gave some sort of
philological / philosophical  explanation, involving the necessity of
using "shall" ("dovere") for the 1st person as opposed to
"will" ("volere") for the 2nd, but I can't say I remember much about
it.
I teach my students that "shall" is mostly used idiomatically and
"should" means "dovrei, dovesrti etc." but warn them that some
educated people still use them instead of "will" and "would".
Ciao
Claudia

 Ci
I think that sums it up nicely. I occasionally say things like "Oh, I should 
like to see that, very much!" knowing that it sounds a bit stilted, and 
somehow it always makes me feel just ever so slightly like
Dame Judi Dench. :-)


 I teach my students that "shall" is mostly used idiomatically 
This would cover the "Shall we dance?" case?

 Joey DoWop Dee
I don't think many British people under, say, 60 would use "shall" for 
"will" or "should" for "would". To tell the truth I'm not sure how many 
speakers of regional English, or rather varieties of English other than BBC 
English, ever have.
My mother sometimes did, but she was born in 1924 into a middle-class 
provincial family and was grammar-school educated, so she would have been 
taught the "rules" about "shall" and "should". I'm pretty sure my father 
never did, and he was a working-class Londoner born in 1920.
They say that since the sixties estuary English, or Cockney-influenced 
southern speech, the way I myself speak (English à la Mick Jagger more or 
less), has been gaining ground on BBC English as an alternative standard, or 
at least modifying the existing standard, so it's not surprising that the 
shall/should forms have all but disappeared.
Of course we still use "shall" in questions to ask someone if they agree 
with what we are proposing:
Shall I get some avocados? = Compro degli avocado? (Tu pensi che dovrei 
comprarne?)
Shall we go to bed? = Andiamo a letto? (Tu vuoi che andiamo a letto?)
Could the above forms be heard in Amercan English?
Chris Pain 

 Could the above forms be heard in Amercan English?
Thanks for that update... I guess my impression comes mostly from watching 
the BBC.
The examples you cite above are frequently heard in American English.
Shall we go? [...] to the movies? [...] home? etc.


 "will" or "should" for "would". 
Some do. I do, though probably not all the time. I say "I shall do so."
and "Oh, I should/shouldn't think so." for instance.

 ha scritto nel messaggio 
news:463c0487$0$94379$7b0f...@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk...

To tell the truth, so do I, as far as the second case is concerned. Though I 
would never say "I shall do so", you're right that "I should/shouldn't think 
so" is quite common. Actually I think it's a case of the set expression, or 
"frase fatta". Another commom example would be "I should say". These 
expressions sound quite normal, whereas I wouldn't expect to hear anyone say 
something like "I should go if I had the money" unless they meant "I ought 
to".
Another case where the more formal variant is found especially in a set 
expression is that of "If I was vs were". In normal situations I might use 
either form, but especially "If I was", for example "If I was forced to 
choose, I would ...". On the other hand I think EVERYONE says "If I were 
you" - I don't think I've ever heard "If I was you". Maybe it's the same in 
Italian. I reckon nearly everyone in Italy would say "Se fossi in te ..." 
(and not "Se ero" or "Se sarei"), including people who are generally 
incapable of using subjunctives correctly.
By the way, I just did a Google search for "If I was forced to choose" vs 
"If I were forced to choose". The former produced 899 hits and the latter 
988. In this case I suspect it's the Americans who prefer the more strictly 
correct "were" while the Brits opt for "was", especially in informal style.
Chris Pain