I am learning English grammar and I learn the auxiliary verb would. But I have some confusion, please solve it.

Recently I read following couple of lines:

  1. "The first tool which we would need is Visual studio code editor"

  2. So in order to expedite the learning process we would be using some tools and software.

  3. This is just to share that we would not have our Daily MVP Scrum meeting call today as Todd is out. Next MVP Scrum meeting would held on 9th Oct. Monday.

My confusion is that whatever rules I have read about would don't fit in the above statements, because the above statements are not following the rules:

  1. They are not a polite statement
  2. They are not conditional
  3. They are not future in past

Can you please make me understand why would has been used in above statements?

  • Only sentence 1 sounds natural to me. Can you tell us the source of these sentences and if they were written by a native speaker?
    – Shoe
    Commented Oct 9, 2017 at 10:16
  • I feel as if #3 should be "The next MVP meeting will be held on Monday, October 9th." , can anyone confirm this? The only reason I could see would be used is in the case that the next MVP meeting will not certainly be held on October 9th. Sorry if this reasoning is unclear. Commented Oct 9, 2017 at 15:32
  • Welcome to ELL @BradleyD'Amato - answers should not be used to clarify the question, so I've converted your answer to a comment. Once you earn a bit more reputation, you will be able to comment everywhere. Until then, please only post answers that answer the question being asked. It's OK to mention corrections to or assumptions about the question in addition to the answer, and is probably a good idea because questions can change if the community or author edits them.
    – ColleenV
    Commented Oct 9, 2017 at 16:07

2 Answers 2


Unfortunately, a great deal of English now published comes from people who are barely competent in the language.

The third of your examples is simply written by someone who is uneducated.

The first two are grammatical if you assume an implied conditional.

"If we wanted to do X, we would need ..." is perfectly grammatical. Of course, it assumes that you are interested in what is being talked about. A less arrogant way to say the same thing is "To use X, you will need...$

The second example is grammatical and can be expressed in other, perhaps more idiomatic, ways similarly to the first example. Note that it is an almost empty thought.

"So, in order to expedite the learning process, we would be using some tools and software if anyone on earth wanted to learn whatever murky nonsense I am propounding."

Many statements that are correct in terms of grammar are still nonsense. The style of using conditionals instead of imperatives without specifying the relevant condition may be grammatical, but it permits interpretation according to any condition whatsoever. If you want to write correctly


There is some context missing, but #1 sounds like part of a tutorial or instruction manual. In such documents the conjunctive is often used, in the way of "If you were to do what we're explaining here, you would need this or that..."

The second one could be explained in the same way. It could also be from an even more hypothetical source, like a proposal: "In order to maximise profits, I suggest we do this. We would be using ...."

The third one sounds odd to me. Also, there is a word missing: "Next MVP Scrum meeting would be held on..."

You must log in to answer this question.