|
|
 #2 (permalink) Thu Mar 09, 2006 18:46 pm Will/would |
|
|
Hi,
This is an example of the sequence of tenses - one after the present and one after the past:
He assures me (Present) he will come
He assured (Past) he would come.
Alan
_________________
English as a Second Language
You can read my ESL story Present Simple |
|
Alan
Co-founder
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
Posts: 13887
Location: UK
|
|
| #3 (permalink) Thu Mar 09, 2006 19:32 pm Will/would |
|
|
thanks alan
i was confosed sice long.now my allcofusion went.thanks for such anice and simple exlanation.
deepti |
|
deepss
Guest
|
 |
| #4 (permalink) Tue May 15, 2007 9:55 am will vs. would |
|
|
hello sir,
a new user here:
i am not sure, but i think i've read somewhere that:
will: is used when the speaker expresses certainty
would: is used when there are some uncertainties in the statement
so in the case of this the speaker "assured" the other person that he will come.
any thoughts on this one sir? |
|
Icemaster
New Member
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 4
Location: Philippines
|
|
| #5 (permalink) Tue May 15, 2007 10:22 am Will vs. would |
|
|
Hi
in the example above would is used because we cannot use will when we're talking about the future from the past.
Take a look at these:
| Quote: |
He assures me (Present) he will come
He assured (Past) he would come.
|
You're talking about a different case, namely about the conditional sentence, when we use would to describe something which is not likely to happen. Like this:
If he were hungry, he would come (probably, he is full, not starving, so he will not come, but there's still a little hope) |
|
Lost_Soul
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 1861
Location: South Park, Colorado, USA
|
|
| #6 (permalink) Tue May 15, 2007 10:33 am Will vs. would |
|
|
Hi icemaster,
You are quite right when you say that 'will' has the sense of determination but it has to be in relation to what is said now. When you repeat what was said, you have to make the changes to the tenses and in that case it becomes: He assured me he would come. It doesn't make sense to refer to the past (he assured) and to the implied future (he will come) within the same time frame.
Alan
_________________
English as a Foreign Language
You can read my EFL story Progressive Forms |
|
Alan
Co-founder
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
Posts: 13887
Location: UK
|
|
| #7 (permalink) Tue May 15, 2007 11:55 am Will vs. would |
|
|
| Alan wrote: |
It doesn't make sense to refer to the past (he assured) and to the implied future (he will come) within the same time frame.
Alan |
Hi, Alan.
The funny thing is that in Russian it makes sense :) That's why my teacher used to tell me the stringent rule: Never use will in a subordinate clause when the main clause is in the past :) |
|
Lost_Soul
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 1861
Location: South Park, Colorado, USA
|
|
| #8 (permalink) Wed May 16, 2007 0:27 am will vs. would |
|
|
| Thanks to both of you :) |
|
Icemaster
New Member
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 4
Location: Philippines
|
|
|
| Why is "left for"? | What does this idiom mean: "to play the goat"? |
