Timeline for Can ‘should’ be omitted, as in this case?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2013 at 4:45 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | I doubt many would pick you up on it, but actually I don't think you can properly say that. The king himself could (just about) say "I command that the people shall kneel immediately", perhaps. But grammatically he might just as well have commanded "that the people will kneel immediately", and that doesn't sit quite right with me. I certainly don't think you can validly use even shall in an indirect reported speech context. | |
| Feb 14, 2013 at 4:23 | comment | added | user485 | Agreed. You could say "The king commanded that all the people shall be assembled at once." and "Abbot and Bessie, I believe I gave orders that Jane Eyre shall be left in the red-room till I came to her myself." | |
| Feb 13, 2013 at 18:32 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | In the context of a king's command, I don't think there's any suggestion of "optionality". In fact, the standard present tense form is often used to convey a "non-optional, will definitely happen" sense, as in You shall go to the ball! | |
| Feb 12, 2013 at 4:27 | vote | accept | Listenever | ||
| Feb 12, 2013 at 4:25 | history | answered | user485 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |