TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Use of "shall" From:"Linda K. Sherman" <linsherm -at- CONCENTRIC -dot- NET> Date:Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:18:36 -0500
Matthew Bin wrote:
>
> Er, is shall archaic? I think it depends where you are. And I find
> that it adds a certain amount of tone to others' writing that is not
> easily achieved in the written medium. (I make no claim about my own
> writing, of course.) I'm not going to crusade to bring it into more
> common usage, but it's worth knowing and using in my opinion.
I'm not entirely certain of this, and all my reference books are packed
in preparation for moving at the moment, but I believe that the rules
about "shall" vs. "will" are largely the product of 19th Century British
prescriptionist grammar, Received Pronunciation, and all that, and not a
reflection of any actual spoken usage that has ever existed (until RP
was invented). These are the same folks who also decided that
"aggravate" does not mean "annoy" and that "hopefully" is not a word.
However, I think it's safe to say that in formal writing, "shall"
indicates requirement and "will" indicates intent.
L.
--
Linda K. Sherman <linsherm -at- concentric -dot- net>
Welsh-related and other stuff to be found at http://www.concentric.net/~linsherm
