|
|
 #2 (permalink) Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:42 am should be vs. would be |
|
|
| This problem happens to have crossed my mind only yesterday! I was sure it must be "should" in such cases, but why? It just feels good. You may be somewhat consoled with the fact that Fowler, the great style guru of 20th-century English, didn't know either. He says about this "should": "we can only guess at its origin". I'd say subordinate clauses of sentences that express some sort of surprise or unexpectedness have "should". Perhaps someone else here knows a better rule for this? |
|
 Cerberus™
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 775
|
|
| #3 (permalink) Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:19 am should be vs. would be |
|
|
Well, I should accept the truth as I usually got the same answers like this! Thanks Cerberus! 
_________________
Thank you very much,
Hieu Phan.
P/s: Please just correct if I'm wrong somewhere! |
|
Hieupt
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 159
Location: Vietnam
|
 |
| #4 (permalink) Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:21 am should be vs. would be |
|
|
| I can give you Fowler's tentative hypothesis, if you're really interested. Be warned that it is somewhat complicated and rather inconclusive. |
|
Cerberus™
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 775
|
|
| #5 (permalink) Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:20 am should be vs. would be |
|
|
| Cerberus™ wrote: |
| I can give you Fowler's tentative hypothesis, if you're really interested. Be warned that it is somewhat complicated and rather inconclusive. |
| Quote: |
| What's that? Does it have anything to do with Fowler's toads? |
_________________
Love love love love co-co-nuts, I I I I Island. |
|
Fimbriae
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Posts: 150
Location: Ceres
|
|
| #6 (permalink) Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:44 am should be vs. would be |
|
|
| Probably not. See my first post. |
|
Cerberus™
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 775
|
|
|
| Me also vs. me too? | What is the meaning of, in the dog's house |
